Harish Chandra Rana 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 120B 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. 409 of 2020 (Special Sessions Trial No. 57 of 2022), registered at police station Jaspur, District Udham Singh Nagar.

A Special Investigation Team was constituted in the matter of scholarship scam in compliance with the order of this Court, passed in Writ Petition No. 33 of 2019. Inspector, Mr. Bheem Bhaskar Arya, was a member of the said Special Investigation Team. After completing the enquiry, he lodged an FIR on 28.11.2020.

Heard Mr. Saurav Adhikari, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. M.K. Chand, learned A.G.A. for the State.

Mr. Saurav Adhikari, Advocate, contended that the applicant, aged about 70 years, has been falsely implicated in the present matter. He was the District Social Welfare Officer, District Udham Singh Nagar. He was posted only three months nineteen days’ in the District Udham Singh Nagar. The institute-in-question was located outside the State of Uttarakhand. There was no provision for physical verification of the students concerned at the relevant time. The matter of the scholarship was examined and verified by the then District Social Welfare Officer and Assistant District Social Welfare Officer. The scholarship was sanctioned after completing all the formalities and enquiry by the then District Social Welfare Officer and his subordinate staff. There was no fault of the applicant in the process of sanctioning the scholarship amount. The scholarship amounts were directly transferred to the bank of the students concerned. Applicant did not misuse any amount of the scholarship. He has not received any amount of scholarship. There is no evidence to connect the applicant with the alleged offence. Applicant had attained the age of superannuation on 30.06.2013. He was not arrested during the course of the investigation. He is a permanent resident of District Udham Singh Nagar, therefore, there is no chance of his absconding. Co-accused persons have been granted Anticipatory Bail by this Court. A charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no requirement of custodial interrogation.

On the other hand, Mr. M.K. Chand, A.G.A., for the State, opposed the Anticipatory Bail Application orally. However, he has submitted that a charge-sheet has already been filed by the Investigating Officer, therefore, there is no need of custodial interrogation.

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- Harish Chandra Rana 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.

Anticipatory Bail Application (No. 293 of 2024) stands disposed of accordingly.