Ashwani Tandon vs State Of Uttarakhand

Alok Kumar Verma, J

This bail application has been filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail in connection with the First

Information Report No.0227 of 2019, registered with Police Station Bahadrabad, District Haridwar for the offence under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468

and 471 of I.P.C.

In the scholarship scam, in compliance of the letter dated 17.04.2018 of the Home Department of State of Uttarakhand, a Special Investigation

Team (SIT) was constituted. Mr. Kamal Kumar Lunthi was appointed as a member of the Special Investigation Team. After enquiry, Mr. Kamal

Kumar Lunthi lodged an FIR on 27.10.2019 against Singhania University, Pilani Road, District Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan/Hemlata Institute, Bahadrabad,

District Haridwar.

Heard Mr. Sanpreet Singh Ajmani, the learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. T.C. Agarwal, the learned Deputy Advocate General for the State

through video conferencing.

Mr. Sanpreet Singh Ajmani, the learned counsel for the applicant, submitted that the present applicant was appointed by Singhania University,

Rajasthan as a Manager of Singhania University, Admission and Examination Centre at Singhania University Off Campus for the programs/courses in

the faculty of M.Tech/ B.Tech/Diploma, Research and Education Programme, Management and M. Pharma. The applicant has annexed a copy of

the said appointment letter dated 19.09.2008, as annexure no.2.

At the request of the learned counsel appearing for the State, time was granted to get instructions regarding the said appointment letter dated

19.09.2008. Today, the learned counsel appearing for the State submitted that the Registrar of Singhania University has stated in his statement, under

Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, that the applicant was not given any appointment letter by Singhania University. However, the

learned counsel appearing for the State submitted that at this stage, it cannot be said that the said appointment letter, annexure no.2, is forged or

genuine.

The learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that the District Social Welfare Officer, Haridwar vide letter dated 29.08.2013, had supplied

a list of 105 students along with their Bank Account details to the Branch Manager of Andra Bank, Roorkee; a Cheque No.770048 dated 29.08.2013

amounting to Rs.50,26,100/- had also been drawn in the name of the Branch Manager, Andra Bank, Roorkee; an amount of scholarship of about 70

students were remitted in the Bank Account of the students being Rs.2,31,000/-approximately and the remaining amount of scholarship of about 35

students being Rs.1,15,500/- approximately was reimbursed in cash to the students; Rs.46,79,600/-was the tuition fee for 105 students. The learned

counsel for the applicant has annexed the said list of the students as annexure no.4. The learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that two

co-accused persons have already been granted bail by this Court; the applicant is in custody since 04.10.2020; he has not been convicted in any

offence, and, charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence.

The learned counsel appearing for the State opposed the bail application and submitted that the applicant has embezzled Rs.50,26,100/-. However,

the learned counsel appearing for the State submitted that the list of the students, annexure no.4, is correct.

Bail is the rule and committal to jail is an exception. Refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual, guaranteed under Article

21 of the Constitution of India. The object of keeping the accused person in detention during the trial is not punishment. The main purpose is manifestly

to secure the attendance of the accused.

Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case, there is no reason to keep

the applicant behind the bars for an indefinite period, therefore, without expressing any opinion as to the merits of the case, this Court is of the view

that the applicant deserves bail at this stage.

The bail application is allowed.

Let the applicant - Ashwani Tandon be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each in the like

amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions :-

i) The applicant shall attend the trial court regularly and he shall not seek any unnecessary adjournment;

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

iii) The applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of this Court.

It is clarified that if the applicant misuses or violates any of the conditions, imposed upon him, the prosecution will be free to move the Court for

cancellation of bail.