Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2023 DIGILAW 419 (UTT)

Rajesh Kumar Chauhan v. State of Uttarakhand

2023-07-24

ALOK KUMAR VERMA

body2023
JUDGMENT : Present Application has been filed for grant of regular bail in connection with the First Information Report No.362 of 2022, registered at police station Raipur, District Dehradun under Section 2/3 of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 (as applicable in the State of Uttarakhand). 2. The First Information Report was lodged by Mr. Baldeep Singh, Senior Sub-Inspector, on 03.09.2022. As per FIR, present applicant and twenty other co-accused persons formed a gang and obtained crores of rupees by leaking the question papers of the Graduate Level Examination held on 4th and 5th December, 2021 and the Secretariat Security Cadre Recruitment Examination held on 26.09.2021. Co-accused Sayyed Sadik Musa is the leader of this gang, whereas, present applicant is a member of the said gang. They are serial offenders and due to their influence, everyone is afraid of giving evidence against them. First Information Report was registered on the basis of two FIRs. These two FIRs are:- (i) FIR No.289 of 2022 under Sections 420,467, 468, 471 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 3/4/5/9/10 of the Uttar Pradesh Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 1998 (as applicable in the State of Uttarakhand). (ii) FIR No.351 of 2022 under Sections 420,467, 468, Section 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 9/10 of the Uttar Pradesh Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 1998. 3. During the investigation, two more FIRs have been found to be registered against the applicant. These two FIRs are :- (i) FIR No.09 of 2022 under Sections 420,466, 467, 201 & Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 3/4/5/7/9/10 of the Uttar Pradesh Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 1998. (ii) FIR No.01 of 2020 under Sections 420,468, 471 & Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. 4. Heard Mr. Arvind Vashistha, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Narayan Har Gupta, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Lalit Sharma, learned counsel for the State. 5. Mr. Arvind Vashisth, Senior Advocate, contended that applicant is the Director of RMS Techno Solution (India) Pvt. Ltd. and he has been falsely implicated in the present matter. 4. Heard Mr. Arvind Vashistha, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Narayan Har Gupta, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Lalit Sharma, learned counsel for the State. 5. Mr. Arvind Vashisth, Senior Advocate, contended that applicant is the Director of RMS Techno Solution (India) Pvt. Ltd. and he has been falsely implicated in the present matter. Involvement of the applicant in the said FIR No.09 of 2022 has not been found during the investigation, and, he has already been granted bail in all three remaining FIRs. 6. Mr. Arvind Vashisth, Senior Advocate, has further submitted that applicant has been granted bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide order dated 11.05.2023 in FIR No.289 of 2022. In FIR No.351 of 2022, bail has been granted by this Court to the applicant vide order dated 02.05.2023 and in FIR No.01 of 2020, bail has been granted to the applicant by the Special Judge, Vigilance, Dehradun vide order dated 28.10.2022. 7. Mr. Lalit Sharma, learned counsel for the respondent, has opposed the bail application. He has submitted that most of the information that the Investigating Officer sought has been provided by the applicant, but some other informations have not been provided by the applicant as yet. However, he fairly conceded that in the said three FIRs, applicant has been granted bail and in FIR No.09 of 2022, applicant has not been arrested yet since involvement of present applicant has not been found so far. 8. In reply, Mr. Arvind Vashisth, Senior Advocate, has submitted that applicant has provided all the information to the Investigating Officer in 800 pages as sought by him. He submitted that applicant undertakes to provide books of account of the Company and remaining information, as sought by the Investigating Officer through his letter dated 13.07.2023 will be provided within two weeks’ from the date of his release on bail. 9. Present applicant has been granted bail in abovementioned three cases, whereas in one case, he is not wanted. Therefore, at this stage, these circumstances give rise to a reasonable ground to presume that the applicant may not be held guilty of the alleged offence and there is nothing on record which may give rise to a reasonable apprehension that the applicant is likely to commit any other offence, in case, he is released on bail. He is in judicial custody since 13.09.2022. He is in judicial custody since 13.09.2022. He is a permanent resident of Lucknow (U.P.), therefore, there is no likelihood of applicant absconding as well. 10. The object of keeping the accused person in detention during the investigation is not punishment. The main purpose is manifestly to secure the attendance of the accused. 11. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case, there is no reason 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. 12. The Bail Application is allowed. 13. Let the applicant-Rajesh Kumar Chauhan 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 with the following conditions :- i) Applicant shall provide books of account of the Company and remaining informations, as undertakes by him, within two weeks from the date of his release on bail; ii) Applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by the Investigating Officer as and when requires; iii) Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of this case; iv) Applicant shall not leave the country without prior permission of the court concerned. 14. It is clarified that if the applicant misuses or violates any of the conditions, imposed upon him, the Investigating Officer will be free to move the court for cancellation of bail.