High CourtsSingle Bench

Md. Imdad Ali vs State Of Manipur And Others

Manipur High Court · Decided on 10 June 2019 · Citation: (2019) 06 MAN CK 0010

HON’BLE JUDGES
M.V. Muralidaran, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Anticipatory Bail (AB) No. 5 Of 2019
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

17 paragraphs · 1,316 words

MV Muralidaran, J

[1] The petitioner who is working as Assistant Teacher in the private school, namely, Munira English School, Sangaiyumpham Part-I, Puleipokpi is in service with utmost dedication, diligence and to the satisfaction of school authorities and students and is one of the favourite teachers of the students.

[2] A complaint has been lodged by one Keithelakpam Tiken Singh, Controller Examination, Board of Secondary Education, Manipur reported to OC/TBL-PS alleged that as per report of the Flying Squad deputed at Wangbal Junior High School on the first day of the HSLC Examination, 2019 i.e. on 20-02-2019, one Akoijam Mukta Singh who is acting as supervising invigilator (SI) in the ongoing HSLC Examination, 2009 took photograph of the English Question paper through his mobile and share it to other persons on whatsapp at the start of the examination, i.e. at Wangbal High Junior School, Wangbal.

Based on that a case has been registered by the respondent police in FIR 13(202019 TBL-PS U/s 420/406/34 IPC & 72 IT Act against this petitioner along with other accused. Based on the registration of the case, the petitioner was impleaded as one of the accused in the case and is searching for arrest.

[3] The petitioner further stated that it is the false case and he had no knowledge about the offence committed by the other accused. The petitioner is a well-respected person having firm integrity and he has no any criminal antecedents whatsoever that would tarnish his reputation till date. There is no possibility of his involvement in the said offence as alleged by the Investigating Agency. Therefore, he has approached this Court and filed this Anticipatory Bail petition.

[4] For the filing of Anticipatory Bail, the second respondent Officer-in-charge, Thoubal Police Station has filed the objection affidavit on 25.04.2019.

[5] In the objection, the respondent Officer-in-Charge, Thoubal Police Station states that on 20-02-2019 at 7:30 pm the complainant namely, Shri Keithelakpam Tiken Singh, S/o K. Aganghal Singh of Mongsangei Maning Leikai, the Controller Examination, Board of Secondary Education, Manipur has lodged a complaint to the Officer-in-Charge, Thoubal Police Station alleging inter alia that as per the report of his Flying Squad Team deputed at the Wangbal Junior High School Centre on the first day of the HSLC Examination, 2019 i.e., 20-02-2019, one person namely, Shri Akoijam Mukta Singh, S/o (L) AK. Kulla Singh of Wangbal Part-II Mamang Leikai, P.O. & P.S. Thoubal acting as Supervising Invigilator (SI) of the said Examination took photographs of the English Question paper through his mobile and shared it to the other persons on Whatsapp as soon as the Examination was started. Such an action of the said person is in violation of the conduct of the examination rules and it caused disturbance to the free and fair conduct of the examination. Thereafter, an FIR was registered for the above alleged offence.

[6] During the course of investigation, the complainant was minutely examined and his statements fully corroborated with the facts of the O.E. lodged by him. Thereafter, visited the spot and inspected the place of occurrence and also drawn rough sketch map with proper index. That, on proper investigation on 21.02.2019, the Mobile handset Model Samsung Galaxy 17 which was used in commission of the aforesaid offence was seized on production by the complainant in presence of the witnesses. Thereafter, Whatsapp status of the seized mobile handset was checked and found that the photographed English Question Paper was transferred to different 4 (four) individual which are saved in the phone as "Ab" bearing Whatsapp No. 7005095704, "A Jibon" bearing Whatsapp No. 841594302, "Mohini" bearing Whatsapp No. 7005517751 and "Nobin 2" bearing Whatsapp No. 8014717624. It is also found that the said person had transferred 3 (three) photocopies of Page No. 8 of the English Question Paper [Code No. 51 MB 17E(N)] to "Ab", "Mohini" and "Nobin 2" at 9:17 am., 9:20 am. and 9:21 am., and another photocopies of Page No. 5 of the said question paper was sent to "A. Jibon" and "Nobin 2" at 9;06 am.

[7] During the course of investigation, the Officer-in-Charge of Thoubal Police Station, Manipur has arrested the accused No. 1 namely, Akoijam Mukta Singh and interrogated and on his interrogation, he admitted that the offence was committed by them and the said question paper was sent to this petitioner by the accused Md. Imdad Ali and thereafter, the 4 (four) accused namely, Elangbam Jibon Singh, Muhini Devi, Kh. Bijen Singh and M. Nobin Singh were arrested and their respective mobile handsets were also seized. On their interrogation, they have admitted the charges levelled against them. Thereafter, they were remanded to judicial custody.

[8] While pending of the above criminal case, the petitioner approached the Ld. Sessions Judge, Thoubal for interim anticipatory bail which was granted by the Ld. Session Judge, Thoubal on 22.02.2019 and pursuant to the order of the Ld. Session Judge, this petitioner appeared before the I.O. of the case on 23.02.2019 and he was examined and seized one MI mobile handset Gold in colour along with one JIO SIM B/No. 7005095704 on his production after following proper formalities. The Officer-in-Charge further states that the petitioner accused admitted the charges levelled against him. However, on checking his mobile handset Whatsapp status it is found that he had deleted the Photos of Question paper from the Gallery. Thereafter, the Ld. Session Judge, Thoubal rejection his bail application on 25.02.2019. Hence, the petitioner was summoned for appearance before the I.O. on a particular date but he failed to comply with. Accordingly, on 02.03.2019 house search was conducted at his residence by the I.O. but he was not found. Efforts have been made to arrest the accused person but till date he is absconding to avoid from police arrest. Therefore, the respondent police has strongly objecting for release of the petitioner and therefore, the prayer for anticipatory bail should be rejected.

[9] Today, when the matter is taken up, I have heard Mr. Ph. Sanajaoba, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Y. Ashang, learned PP for the State respondents.

[10] When the matter was taken up on 09.04.2019, this Court passed an order that this Court by order dated 03.04.2019 directed the Investigating Officer to file a report as to why he has not arrested the petitioner/accused even after the Anticipatory Bail was dismissed by the Learned Sessions Court on 25.02.2019 and thereafter, directed to file a report before this Court. Accordingly on 25.04.2019, the report was filed. Admittedly, the main accused in this case were arrested and thereafter, they were released on bail. Though the petitioner was initially granted anticipatory bail but later on the Ld. Sessions Judge, Thoubal has dismissed the anticipatory bail petition on 25.02.2019. Even then, the respondent police has not taken any serious steps to arrest the petitioner till date though the offence was serious in nature and even after the anticipatory bail was dismissed on 25.02.2019 by the Ld. Sessions Judge, Thoubal.

[11] Though the investigation was almost over which was reported by the learned PP and hence granting of anticipatory bail to this petitioner/accused will not prejudice in any way since this petitioner was already examined in detail by the I.O. on 23.02.2019 based on the interim anticipatory bail granted by the Ld. Session Judge, Thoubal. Therefore, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner by passing the following order :-

(a) the petitioner is released on bail on condition that the petitioner should execute a surety for a sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) with two sureties each like sum to the satisfaction of the Ld. Session Judge, Thoubal;

(b) the petitioner is directed to appear before the respondent police daily morning at 10 a.m. and evening at 5 p.m.;

(c) the petitioner is directed not to tamper or hamper the witnesses or documents.

[12] Accordingly, the anticipatory bail petition stands allowed as above.