Saurabh Barwal 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.114 of 2023, registered at police station, Kotwali, Laksar, District Haridwar.

Applicant – Saurabh Barwal is in judicial custody under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 506 and Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, learned counsel appearing for the State, has opposed the bail application. He submitted that the co-accused persons had received money from the informant in the name of providing a job to the informant. A raid was conducted by the Investigating Officer. Several forged appointment letters were recovered from the officer of the present applicant and co-accused persons. A mobile phone was also recovered at the instance of the present applicant. After completion of the investigation, charge-sheet has been filed.

Mr. Pranav Singh, Advocate, appearing for the applicant, contended that the applicant has been implicated in this matter. He is an innocent person. Nothing was recovered from the possession of the present applicant. The said mobile phone was not recovered at the instance of the applicant. The said mobile phone does not belong to the applicant. The alleged recoveries were planted. Applicant did not receive any amount from the informant. Applicant has no criminal history. He is a permanent resident of District Haridwar, therefore, there is no possibility of his absconding. He is in custody since 31.01.2023, and, charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence. One co-accused of the similar role, namely, Dinesh Dogra has already been granted bail by this Court.

Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, learned counsel appearing for the State submitted on instructions that no evidence has been found regarding the ownership of the recovered mobile phone.

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, 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 – Saurabh Barwal 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;

It is clarified that if the applicant misuses or violates any of the conditions, imposed upon him, application may be filed to cancel the bail order.