Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2024 DIGILAW 169 (UTT)

Reetu v. State of Uttarakhand

2024-03-06

ALOK KUMAR VERMA

body2024
JUDGMENT : (Alok Kumar Verma, J.) : These four 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. 12 of 2023, registered at police station Kankhal, District Haridwar. 2. The applicant-Smt. Reetu 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”). 3. The applicant- Sanjeev Prakash Chaturvedi is in judicial custody under Sections 409, 411, 420, 201, 120B IPC, Section 4, Section 5, Section 7, Section 10 of the Act, 1998, Section 7 and Section 13 of the Act, 1988. 4. The applicant- Sanjay Dhariwal 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. 5. The applicant-Pramod Kumar Chauhan is in judicial custody under Sections 409, 420, 120B IPC, Section 3, Section 4, Section 9, Section 10 of the Act, 1998, Section 8 and Section 12 of the Act, 1988. 6. All these four Bail Applications have arisen from one case crime number i.e. Case Crime No. 12 of 2023, therefore, these four Bail Applications are being considered and decided by this common order. The file of the Bail Application No. 1179 of 2023 is leading file. 7. In brief, the prosecution’s case 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. The examinations for the post of Patwari/Lekhpal were conducted by the Uttarakhand Public Service Commission on 08.01.2023. According to the First Information Report dated 12.01.2023, co-accused Rajpal Singh along with co-accused Sanjeev Kumar leaked the paper and sold to the candidates and received money from them. The First Information Report was registered against the applicants, Sanjeev Kumar Chaturvedi, Smt. Reetu and Pramod Kumar Chauhan and four other co-accused persons. 8. According to the First Information Report dated 12.01.2023, co-accused Rajpal Singh along with co-accused Sanjeev Kumar leaked the paper and sold to the candidates and received money from them. The First Information Report was registered against the applicants, Sanjeev Kumar Chaturvedi, Smt. Reetu and Pramod Kumar Chauhan and four other co-accused persons. 8. During the course of the investigation, it was found that on 05.01.2023, Smt. Reetu, the applicant and the applicant-Sanjeev Prakash Chaturvedi, the husband of Smt. Reetu, along with other co-accused persons went from Khanpur, District Haridwar to Delhi. Thereafter, Smt. Reetu along with other co-accused persons and six candidates went to a flat situated at Madhur Vihar, Dwarika, South Delhi, where, the said candidates were shown the question papers of the aforesaid examinations. The said locations of the applicant-Smt. Reetu are supported by her mobile phone details. During the course of the investigation, the names of the applicant-Pramod Kumar Chauhan and applicant-Sanjay Dhariwal came into light and from their possession leaked examination papers, heavy amount of cash, blank cheques, issued by candidates, were recovered. 9. 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. 10. 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 interrogations. 11. Applicants, Smt. Reetu, Sanjeev Prakash Chaturvedi and Sanjay Dhariwal, are the residents of District Haridwar, and, the applicant-Pramod Kumar Chauhan is a permanent resident of District Dehradun, therefore, there is no chance of their absconding. 12. 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. 13. 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. 13. Applicants Smt. Reetu, Sanjeev Prakash Chaturvedi and applicant-Pramod Kumar Chauhan are in judicial custody since 13.01.2023. The applicant-Sanjay Dhariwal is in judicial custody since 31.03.2023. 14. 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. 15. 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. 16. The Bail Applications are allowed. 17. Let the applicants – Smt. Reetu, Sanjeev Prakash Chaturvedi, Sanjay Dhariwal and Pramod Kumar Chauhan 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. 18. 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. 19. A copy of this order be placed on the record of the connected bail applications.