Nitin Srivastava vs State Of Uttarakhand

Alok Kumar Verma, J

Present 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.73 of 2020, registered at police station Selaqui, District Dehradun. Applicant is in judicial custody under Sections 420, 406, 120 B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 3, 4, 5 read with Sections 21, 22, 23 and Section 25 of the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019.

Mr. Pramod Tiwari, Brief Holder, submits that as per FIR, the informant and other persons invested Rs.1,55,000/- (Rupees one lakh fifty five thousand) in Arise India Himalaya Vidhi Finance Company, but, after maturity of the scheme, the said Company did not return the money of the investors. Present applicant was a Director of the said Company. Six other cases against the present applicant are pending.

Mr. Pawan Mishra, Advocate, contended that the applicant is an innocent person. Applicant has been granted bail in all the said cases. The co-accused Kapil Dev Sharma has been acquitted on the basis of the compromise. Applicant has not been convicted by any Court. Prosecution has examined two witnesses in the present matter, therefore, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence, and, the applicant is in custody since 30.09.2021.

On the other hand, Mr. Pramod Tiwari, Brief Holder, opposed the bail application. However, he fairly conceded that the applicant has been granted bail in all the cases.

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, there is no reason to keep the applicant behind the bars for an indefinite period, therefore, 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- Nitin Srivastava 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 with the following conditions :-

i) Applicant shall attend the trial court regularly and he will 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 prior permission of the Trial Court.

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