Jagmohan Singh Kafola 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 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B, Section 406 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.214 of 2020, registered at police station Nanakmatta, District Udham Singh Nagar.

In the scholarship scam matter, a Special Investigation Team was constituted in compliance with the order of this Court, passed in Writ Petition No. 33 of 2019. The informant- N.N. Pant, the Inspector, was a member of the said Special Investigation Team. After enquiry, he lodged an FIR on 26.07.2020 against the co-accused persons. Investigation was conducted. After conclusion of the investigation, a charge-sheet was filed by the Investigating Officer against the present applicant and co-accused persons.

Heard Mr. Amar Murti Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. M.K. Chand, learned A.G.A. for the State.

Mr. Amar Murti Shukla, Advocate, contended that the applicant is presently posted as Deputy Director, Social Welfare Directorate, Uttarakhand, Haldwani, District Nainital. He joined his service in the year, 1996 as Assistant District Development Officer (Social Welfare). He was posted as District Social Welfare Officer at Udham Singh Nagar from the year 2011 to 2014. He has received appreciations from the Competent Authority at various stages during his services. The Institute-in-question was located outside the State of Uttarakhand. The present matter is governed by the Government Order No. 694 dated 25.07.2006, in which, there was a provision for granting the scholarship amount in the accounts of the concerned institutes. At the time of disbursement of the scholarship, there was no provision of physical verification of the concerned students and the Social Welfare Department issued different account payee cheques in the name of individual students. Thus, the applicant was at no fault in the process of disbursement of the scholarship.

Mr. Amar Murti Shukla, Advocate, further submitted that the charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, custodial interrogation of the applicant is not required. Applicant, aged about 55 years, has been granted interim anticipatory bail in the present matter. He is not a previous convict. He is a Government Servant, therefore, there is no likelihood of his absconding.

Opposing the Anticipatory Bail Application, Mr. M.K. Chand, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State, submitted that the applicant was responsible for verification of documents, submitted by “Maa Gayatri Institute of Management and Technology, Gajraula, Uttar Pradesh” regarding grant of scholarship, and, it was the present applicant who overlooked basic and apparent irregularities in the documents, submitted on behalf of the students. Applicant in collusion with the said institute wrongly verified the documents of the concerned students and caused substantial loss to the Government Exchequer. However, Mr. M.K. Chand, A.G.A., submitted that a charge-sheet has already been filed and cognizance has been taken by the Trial Court, therefore, custodial interrogation of the applicant is not required.

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- Jagmohan Singh Kafola 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. 236 of 2022) stands disposed of accordingly.