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
13 paragraphs · 507 wordsAlok 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, 467, 468, 471 and Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 in connection with the Case Crime No. 01 of 2020, registered at police station Ranikhet, District Almora.
In the scholarship scam matter, a Special Investigation Team was constituted in compliance with the order, passed by this Court in Writ Petition (PIL) No. 33 of 2019. Mr. Surendra Singh Ringwal, the Sub-Inspector, was appointed as a member of the said Special Investigation Team. After conducting the enquiry, he lodged an FIR on 10.01.2020. Upon conclusion of the investigation, a charge-sheet was filed by the Investigating Officer against the present applicant and co-accused persons.
Heard Mr. D.C.S. Rawat, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. V.K. Jemini, learned Deputy Advocate General for the State.
Mr. D.C.S. Rawat, Advocate, contended that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present matter. He was working as General Manager of Monad University, Hapur, Uttar Pradesh. He did not receive scholarship amount. He was not a beneficiary. He did not disburse any scholarship amount. He is a permanent resident of District Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh, therefore, there is no chance of his absconding. He has not been convicted by any Court. He has been granted interim anticipatory bail in the present matter. The anticipatory bail applications of Devendra Pal Singh, Registrar of the said University, Shashank Jain, the Trustee of the Society/Chairman of the said University, Ramesh Aggarwal, Pro-Chancellor of the said University have already been allowed by learned Sessions Judge, Almora. Charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no requirement of custodial interrogation.
Learned counsel appearing for the State has opposed the Anticipatory Bail Application. However, he submits that a charge-sheet has already been filed, 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- Ram Pukar Maurya 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. 196 of 2021) stands disposed of accordingly.
