Chandan Singh Manral vs State Of Uttarakhand

Alok Kumar Verma, J

Present Application has been filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail in connection with Case Crime No.01 of 2020, registered at police station Vigilance Establishment Sector, Dehradun, District Dehradun. Applicant is in judicial custody under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 201 and Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

Mr. Pradeep Pant, Inspector, Vigilance Sector, Dehradun lodged a First Information Report on 08.01.2020 that he had conducted an open enquiry regarding the rigging in the Gram Panchayat Development Officer Examination, 2016, in which, serious irregularities were found.

Heard Mr. Arvind Vashisth, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Ms. Divya Jain, learned Advocate for the applicant and Mr. Lalit Sharma, learned Special Counsel for the State.

Mr. Lalit Sharma, learned Special Advocate for the State, contended that the present applicant in connivance with co-accused Kendra Pal and Rajesh Kumar Chauhan had manipulated the OMR sheet of his son to get his son selected in the said examination.

Mr. Arvind Vashisth, learned Senior Advocate contended that applicant has not been named in the First Information Report. He has been falsely implicated in the present matter. The prosecution has not produced any evidence, which would link with the present applicant to the allegations as levelled against him. Co-accused Rajesh Chauhan was granted bail by the Special Judge, Vigilance Establishment and co-accused Hakam Singh, who is believed to be the main conspirator, has also been granted bail by the Special Judge, Vigilance Establishment. Applicant is not a previous convict. He is a permanent resident of District Nainital, therefore, there is no likelihood of his absconding. Charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence, and, the applicant is in judicial custody since 05.11.2022.

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 merit 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- Chandan Singh Manral 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) Applicant shall attend the trial court regularly and he will 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 previous permission of the Trial Court.

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