Anurag Shankhdhar vs State Of Uttarakhand

Alok Kumar Verma, J

Present Application has been filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of Anticipatory Bail under Sections 409, 420, 466, 467, 468, 471, Section 120 B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 13 (1) (d) read with Section 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 in connection with the Case Crime No.38 of 2020 (Special Sessions Trial No.06 of 2022), registered at police station Kunda, District Udham Singh Nagar.

Heard Mr. Navneet Kaushik, learned counsel for applicant and Mr. M.K. Chand, learned A.G.A. for State.

Mr. Navneet Kaushik, Advocate, submitted that in the First Anticipatory Bail Application, filed by the applicant, an interim anticipatory bail was granted by this Court on 30.06.2021. The Investigating Officer had accepted his bail bonds. Applicant was under the impression that he has been granted an interim anticipatory bail and there is nothing left in the matter, hence, on 31.12.2021, he got his Anticipatory Bail Application dismissed as infructuous.

The case of the prosecution is that, in the scholarship scam matter, a Special Investigation Team was constituted in compliance with the order, passed by this Court in PIL No.33 of 2019.

Mr. Bheem Bhaskar, the Inspector, was a member of the said Special Investigation Team. After enquiry, he lodged an FIR on 11.03.2020 against the co-accused persons. Upon conclusion of the investigation, a charge-sheet was filed by the Investigating Officer against the present applicant and co-accused persons.

Opposing the Anticipatory Bail Application, Mr. M.K. Chand, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State, submitted that the applicant was responsible for verification of documents submitted by “Dr. B.N.C.P.E. College of Physical Education Yawatmal, Maharastra” regarding grant of scholarship, but, he overlooked basic and apparent irregularities in the documents submitted on behalf of the students. Applicant in collusion with the said Institute wrongly verified the documents of the concerned persons and caused Rs.4,27,950/- wrongful loss to the Government Exchequer. The allegations against the applicant have been verified on two fronts i.e. departmental enquiry by the Institution as well as investigation, conducted by the Investigating Officer. However, the copy of the enquiry report has not been filed by the State.

Mr. M.K. Chand, learned A.G.A., submitted that a charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, custodial interrogation of the applicant is not required.

Mr. Navneet Kaushik, Advocate, contended that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present matter. He was not named in the First Information Report. He was posted as District Social Welfare Officer, District Udham Singh Nagar on 27.05.2014 and remained posted till 02.12.2015, which was the total tenure of the applicant in the District. In respect of the institutes established outside the State of Uttarakhand, there was no policy prior to 15.07.2015 for physical verification of the students, studying in the said institutes and only by Government Order No.1197 dated 15.07.2015 for the first time a policy was brought forward for verification of the students, studying in the institutes established outside the State of Uttarakhand when the system became online for grant of scholarship. In spite of there being no policy for physical verification of the students still the applicant in his own wisdom got the students physically verified through his subordinate namely Harish Nath Goswami vide letter dated 16.01.2015, who submitted his verification report that the students are studying in the institute. Applicant had no reason not to rely on the report of his subordinate while granting the scholarship.

Mr. Navneet Kaushik, Advocate, further submitted that the bonafide of the applicant can be assessed from the fact that in spite of fact that academic year 2014-15 was offline in respect of institutes, but, still as a matter of abundant caution applicant had ensured that the scholarship amount which includes the tuition fee were transferred to the students’ accounts. Account payee cheques were issued by the applicant in the name of the concerned students. After the release of the scholarship, he further ensured by writing a letter to the concerned college, sent through Official post, directing them that if at any point of time it is found that the students claiming the scholarship are not entitled for the same, then the concerned college would be responsible for the same and will have to refund the amount to the Social Welfare Department.

Mr. Navneet Kaushik, Advocate, further submitted that the applicant has retired from the post of Deputy Director, Directorate of Tribal Welfare, Uttarakhand on 30.06.2023. No alleged enquiry was ever conducted against him. He is a permanent resident of District Dehradun, therefore, there is no likelihood of his absconding. The present matter rests on the documentary evidence. A charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence, and, custodial interrogation is not required.

Personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India is very precious fundamental right and it should be curtailed only when it becomes imperative according to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, applicant- Anurag Shankhdhar is directed to be released on Anticipatory Bail, in the event of his arrest, on furnishing his personal bond of Rs. 30,000/- and two reliable sureties, each in the like amount on the following conditions:-

(i) Applicant shall attend the Trial court regularly and he shall not seek any unnecessary adjournment;

(ii) Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of this case.

(iii) Applicant shall not leave the country without the previous permission of the Trial Court.

It is clarified that if the applicant misuses or violates any of the conditions, imposed upon him, the concerned authority will be free to move the Court for cancellation of the anticipatory bail.

Second Anticipatory Bail Application (No.52 of 2023) stands disposed of accordingly.