High CourtsSingle Bench

Devendra Singh vs State Of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 15 May 2024 · Citation: (2024) 05 UK CK 0036

HON’BLE JUDGES
Alok Kumar Verma, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 438 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 120B, 409, 420, 466, 467, 468, 471 · Prevention Of Corruption Act, 1988 — Section 7A, 8, 10, 13(1)(d), 13(2) · Constitution Of India, 1950 — Article 21
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Anticipatory Bail Application No. 425 Of 2024
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

13 paragraphs · 476 words

Alok Kumar Verma, J

1.

The present Application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been filed for Anticipatory Bail under Sections 409, 420, 466, 467, 468, 471, 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 7A, Section 8, Section 10 and Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

2.

Heard Mr. Ankush Kumar Tyagi, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, learned AGA assisted by Mr. Rakesh Negi, learned Brief Holder for the State.

3.

Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, Advocate, argued that the allegations against the present applicant are that the accounts of 10 persons with different addresses from those mentioned in the applications of 10 students submitted to the Social Welfare Department were opened by the present applicant, Branch-in-Charge of Mini Bank Customer Service Center, Meghawala.

4.

Mr. Ankush Kumar Tyagi, Advocate, contended that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present matter. He had opened the accounts of the said persons in accordance with rules. He is not a beneficiary of the scholarship scheme. He did not receive any amount of scholarship. He was not arrested during the course of the investigation. He was granted interim relief in WPCRL No.2040 of 2020. He is a permanent resident of District Udham Singh Nagar. He is not a previous convict. He is an Officer of Mini Bank Customer Service Center, Meghawala, therefore, there is no possibility of his absconding. Charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence.

5.

Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, learned counsel for the State has opposed the Anticipatory Bail Application orally. However, he submitted that the Investigating Officer has filed the charge-sheet, therefore, he does not want to interrogate the applicant.

6.

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.

7.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, applicant – Devendra Singh 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.

8.

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

9.

Anticipatory Bail Application (No.425 of 2024) stands disposed of accordingly.