Dinesh Dogra vs State Of Uttarakhand

Alok Kumar Verma, J

This Application has been filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail in connection with the Case Crime No.111 of 2023, registered at police station Kotwali Laksar, District Haridwar.

Applicant is in judicial custody under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

The case of the prosecution is that in the name of providing a job to the informant’s nephew, Rs. 9 Lakh was received from the informant by the co-accused Qadir. Qadir’s brother Rizwan abused and threatened the informant’s daughter. The First Informant Report was registered against the co-accused Qadir and Rizwan. The name of the present applicant came to light in the confessional statement of the co-accused Qadir and after the said confessional statement, a raid was conducted and several forged appointment letters and forged training certificates were recovered from the office of the present applicant and three other co-accused persons. After completion of the investigation, the charge-sheet has been filed.

Heard Mr. Akshay Pradhan, learned counsel with Mr. Vishal Kumar Nautiyal, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, learned AGA for the State.

Mr. Akshay Pradhan, Advocate, appearing for the applicant, contended that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present matter. Nothing was recovered from his possession. Applicant is not named in the First Information Report. The name of the applicant came to light in the confessional statement of the co-accused Qadir. Applicant is in custody since 30.01.2023. He has no criminal history. He is a permanent resident of District Haridwar, 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, a co-accused Khursheed Alam has already been granted bail by this Court.

Learned counsel for the State has opposed the bail application. However, he has fairly conceded that a co-accused of the similar role, namely, Khursheed Alam has already been granted bail by this Court.

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, 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 – Dinesh Dogra 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 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;

It is clarified that if the applicant misuses or violates any of the conditions, imposed upon him, application may be filed to cancel the bail order.