High CourtsSingle Bench

Saurabh vs State Of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 28 February 2024 · Citation: (2024) 02 UK CK 0065

HON’BLE JUDGES
Alok Kumar Verma, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 120B, 409, 420Uttar Pradesh Public Examinations (Prevention Of Unfair Means) Act, 1998 — Section 9, 10 · Prevention Of Corruption Act, 1988 — Section 8, 12
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
First Bail Application No. 1335 Of 2023
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

14 paragraphs · 518 words

Alok Kumar Verma, J

1.

This Application has been filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail in connection with the First Information No.12 of 2023, registered at police station Kankhal, District Haridwar.

2.

Present applicant is in judicial custody under Sections 409, 420, 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 9, Section 10 of the Uttar Pradesh Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 1998, Section 8 and Section 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

3.

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. The said examinations were conducted by the Uttarakhand Public Service Commission on 08.01.2023.

4.

The First Information Report was registered on 12.01.2023. As per the First Information Report, Rajpal Singh (co-accused) along with Sanjeev Kumar (co-accused) leaked the paper and sold to the candidates and received money from them. The First Information Report was registered against the co-accused persons. During the course of the investigation, it was found that the present applicant, namely, Saurabh along with co-accused Deepak alias Deepak Kumar and Dharmendra purchased a printer and made copies of the question paper.

5.

Mr. Pranav Singh, Advocate, contended that the applicant has been implicated in the present matter. The co-accused of the similar role, namely, Deepak alias Deepak Kumar has been granted regular bail by this Court. Applicant is in judicial custody since 22.01.2023. He does not have any criminal antecedents. He is a permanent resident of District, Haridwar, therefore, there is no chance of his absconding, and, the charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no possibility of tampering with the evidence.

6.

Ms. Manisha Bhandari, learned Special Counsel, has opposed the bail application. However, she has fairly submitted that the co-accused of the similar role Deepak alias Deepak Kumar has been granted regular bail by this Court.

7.

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 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.

8.

The Bail Application is allowed.

9.

Let the applicant – Saurabh 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 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.

10.

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