Rajnish Bansal vs State Of Uttarakhand And Another

Alok Kumar Verma, J

This Application has been filed by the applicant Rajnish Bansal seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 403 of 2019 (Criminal Case No. 5318 of 2021), registered at Police Station SIDCUL, District Haridwar.

Pursuant to a letter dated 17.04.2018 of the Principal Secretary, Home, a Special Investigation Team was constituted in the scholarship scam matter. Inspector Kamal Kumar Lunthi was a member of the Special Investigation Team. He inquired the matter. In inquiry, he found that scholarship amount of Rs.16,34,750/- was released for 65 students of Himalayan Group of Professional Institutions, Sirmaur, KALA-AMB, District Sirmaur (Himachal Pradesh) for the year, 2014-15. Bank accounts of students were not operated by them (students). Several students did not take admission in the said institute. After completion of the inquiry, Inspector Kamal Kumar Lunthi lodged an FIR on 18.11.2019 against the owner and manager of the said institute.

Heard Mr. Subhash Chand Burman, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Pradeep Lohani, learned Brief Holder for the respondents.

Mr. Subhash Chand Burman, Advocate, contended that the said institute was run by a trust, “Maa Saraswati Education Trust”. Applicant, aged about 61 years, was the Chairman of the said trust. Social Welfare Department directly deposited scholarship amount in the bank accounts of the students. During the course of the investigation, the Investigating Officer recorded the statements of the concerned students and all the students stated that they had taken admission in the said institute and they had opened their account in the bank and they withdrew the scholarship amount.

Mr. Subhash Chand Burman, Advocate, further submitted that the applicant is not a convicted person. He is a permanent resident of District Kurukshetra (Haryana), therefore, there is no possibility of his absconding. During the course of the investigation, he was not arrested. The Investigating Officer has filed the charge-sheet against the applicant along with relevant documents, therefore, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence.

Mr. Pradeep Lohani, Brief Holder, on the other hand, opposed the anticipatory bail application orally. However, he submitted that the Investigating Officer has already filed a charge-sheet against the applicant for the offence under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468 and Section 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, therefore, there is no requirement of custodial interrogation of the applicant.

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.

Having heard the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the present Application, filed for anticipatory bail, is allowed. It is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant Rajnish Bansal, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on executing a personal bond of Rs. 30,000/- and two reliable sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer, subject to 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 made clear that if the applicant misuses or violates any of the conditions, imposed upon him, the prosecution agency will be free to move the Court for cancellation of the anticipatory bail.