Sanjay Dhariwal And Others vs State Of Uttarakhand

Alok Kumar Verma, J

These three Bail Applications have been filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail in connection with the Case Crime No.45 of 2023, registered at police station Kankhal, District Haridwar.

All these three Bail Applications have arisen from one case crime number i.e. Case Crime No.45 of 2023, therefore, these three Bail Applications are being considered and decided by this common order. The file of of the Bail Application No. 1747 of 2023 is leading file.

The applicant- Sanjay Dhariwal is in judicial custody under Sections 409, 411, 420, 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short, “IPC”), Section 9, Section 10 of the Uttar Pradesh Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 1998 (in short, “Act, 1998”) (as applicable in the State of Uttarakhand), Section 8 and Section 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (in short, “Act, 1988”).

The applicant-Sanjeev Kumar is in judicial custody under Sections 409, 411, 420, 120B IPC, Section 4, Section 5, Section 7, Section 10 of the Act, 1998, Section 7 and Section 13 of the Act, 1988.

The applicant-Vivek alias Vikky is in judicial custody under Sections 409, 411, 420, 120B IPC, Section 9, Section 10 of the Act, 1998, Section 8 and Section 12 of the Act, 1988.

The case of the prosecution is that on 12.01.2023, Mr. Pradeep Singh Rana, the Inspector, received an information that several persons were involved in a scam related to paper leak for the post of Patwari/Lekhpal. Therefore, an FIR (FIR No.12 of 2023) was registered. During the course of the investigation in FIR No. 12 of 2023, a register was recovered at the instance of co-accused Sanjeev Dubey (co-accused) on 22.01.2023. The said register contained the names of those students who were appearing in the Assistant Engineer / Junior Engineer examination. Several note books, caste certificates, educational certificates, residence proof and two blank cheques of the students appearing for the said examinations were recovered at the instance of Rajpal (co-accused). From these recoveries, it was revealed that Assistant Engineer / Junior Engineer examination papers were leaked. During the course of the investigation, it was found that applicant-Sanjay Dhariwal took several blank cheques from the candidates. Applicant-Sanjeev Kumar was the custodian of the question papers of the said examination. Rs.4,50,000/-(Four Lakh Fifty Thousand) were recovered at his instance. Rs.2.00 Lakh (Two Lakh) cash, two LEDs, one Camera and four blank cheques were recovered on the pointing out of the applicant-Vivek alias Vikky.

Learned counsel appearing for the applicants contended that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present matter. They are innocent persons. All the allegations made against them are false, which the prosecution has to prove during the trial itself. Co-accused persons have been granted bail by this Court. Applicants are not previous convicts. The charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no need of custodial interrogation and there is no chance of tampering with the evidence.

Mr. Arvind Vashisth, Senior Advocate appearing for the applicant-Sanjeev Kumar, submitted that the applicant had executed an agreement to sell his property, in which he had received Rs.4.00 Lakh (Four Lakh) as advance, which was recovered by the police.

Mr. S.R.S. Gill, learned counsel appearing for the applicant-Vivek alias Vikky, has submitted that the said money, blank cheques, LEDs and camera were not recovered at the instance of the applicant. The said recoveries were planted.

On the other hand, Ms. Manisha Bhandari, learned Special Counsel for the State has opposed the bail applications. However, she has conceded that charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no need of custodial interrogation.

Applicants, Sanjay Dhariwal, Sanjeev Kumar and Vivek alias Vikky, are the residents of District Haridwar. Therefore, there is no chance of their absconding.

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.

Applicant-Sanjay Dhariwal is in judicial custody since 31.03.2023. Applicant-Sanjeev Kumar is in judicial custody since 04.02.2023, and, applicant-Vivek alias Vikky is in judicial custody since 10.02.2023.

Learned counsel appearing for the applicants submitted that the applicants have been in judicial custody for almost a year, but the trial has not commenced yet.

Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case, no reason is found to keep the applicants 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 applicants deserve bail at this stage.

The Bail Applications are allowed.

Let the applicants – Sanjay Dhariwal, Sanjeev Kumar and Vivek alias Vikky be released on bail on their executing personal bonds and furnishing two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned on the following conditions:-

i) Applicants shall attend the Trial Court regularly and they shall not seek any unnecessary adjournment;

ii) Applicants shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of this case.

(iii) Applicants shall not leave the country without the previous permission of the Trial Court.

It is clarified that if the applicants misuse or violate any of the conditions, imposed upon them, the prosecution agency will be free to move the court for cancellation of bail.

A copy of this order be placed on the record of the connected bail applications.