Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2024 DIGILAW 344 (UTT)

Dal Chand Singh v. State of Uttarakhand

2024-05-15

ALOK KUMAR VERMA

body2024
JUDGMENT : ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J. 1. The present Applications have been filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for regular bail in connection with the Case Crime No. 281 of 2023, registered at police station Kotwali Dehradun, District Dehradun. 2. The applicants-Dal Chand Singh and Kamal Virmani are in judicial custody for the offence under Sections 120B, 420, 467, 468 and Section 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. 3. These two Bail Applications have arisen from one case crime number i.e. Case Crime No. 281 of 2023, therefore, these two Bail Applications are being considered and decided by this common order. Record of the Bail Application No. 2225 of 2023 is leading file. 4. The case of the prosecution is that false sale deeds/title deeds have been made of vacant lands situated in Dehradun or those lands whose owners do not reside in Dehradun. The said forged sale deeds/title deeds have been replaced with the original sale deeds/title deeds kept in the Sub-Registrar Office, Dehradun. Mutation proceedings have also been initiated on the basis of these false sale deeds/title deeds. During the investigation, involvement of the present applicants and other co-accused in the offence was found. The applicant-Dal Chand Singh had bound the false deeds in the Zild by replacing the original deeds, whereas, false documents were drafted by the applicant-Kamal Virmani and some of the drafted documents were recovered from the computer of his chamber. 5. Mr. Ajay Veer Pundir, Advocate, contended that the applicant never discharged the duty of binder. He had not replaced any original documents. He had worked in the office of Sub-Registrar on the post of Computer Operator and that too through outsourcing agency only for six months from 01.09.2011 to 29.02.2012. Applicant, who is an innocent person, is in custody since 12.08.2023. 6. Mr. Aditya Singh, Advocate, contended that the applicant has been arrested on the oral statements of co-accused and one Mr. Arpit Chawla, an Advocate, recorded during the course of the investigation. He further submitted that no incriminating article has been recovered from his computer. The alleged forged sale deeds/title deeds have not yet been declared forged by any Competent Court. Applicant is a senior member of Bar, Dehradun, who has been in practice for about 27 years and has an impeccable career. He is in judicial custody since 27.08.2023. He further submitted that no incriminating article has been recovered from his computer. The alleged forged sale deeds/title deeds have not yet been declared forged by any Competent Court. Applicant is a senior member of Bar, Dehradun, who has been in practice for about 27 years and has an impeccable career. He is in judicial custody since 27.08.2023. Charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence, and one co-accused of the similar role, namely, Imran Ahmad, has already been granted regular bail by this Court. 7. Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, A.G.A. appearing for the State, has opposed the bail applications. However, he has submitted that no incriminating article has been recovered from the computer of the applicant-Kamal Virmani regarding the drafting of the forged documents. Charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no requirement of custodial interrogations of the applicants. 8. 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 in detention during the trial is not punishment. The main purpose is manifestly to secure the attendance of the accused. 9. 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. 10. The Bail Applications are allowed. 11. Let the applicants- Dal Chand Singh and Kamal Virmani be released on bail on their 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) Applicants shall attend the Trial Court regularly and they will 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. 12. 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. 13. (ii) Applicants shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of this case. 12. 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. 13. A copy of this order be placed on the record of the connected bail application.