JUDGMENT : Alok Kumar Verma, J. This 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. 1 of 2020, registered at Vigilance Establishment Sector, Dehradun, District Dehradun. 2. Applicant is in judicial custody under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 201 and Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. 3. Mr. Pradeep Pant, the Inspector, Vigilance Sector, Dehradun lodged an FIR on 08.01.2020 that he had conducted an open enquiry regarding the rigging in the Gram Panchayat Development Officer Examination, 2016, in which, serious irregularities were found. 4. Heard Mr. S.R.S. Gill, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Lalit Sharma, learned Special Counsel for the State. 5. Opposing the bail application, Mr. Lalit Sharma, learned Special Counsel for the State, submitted that the role of the present applicant is that he received Rs.12,00,000/- from one Gautam Kashyap in order to get him selected. 6. Mr. S.R.S. Gill, Advocate, contended that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present matter. He had not received any money from any person. The source of the said amount i.e. Rs.12,00,000/- has not been disclosed by the said Gautam Kashyap, who had given oral statement of giving the said money to the applicant. There is nothing on record to connect the applicant with the present matter apart from the oral testimony of Gautam Kashyap. Charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence. Applicant is in custody since 22.05.2023. He is a permanent resident of District Kanpur Dehat, therefore, there is no possibility of his absconding, and, co-accused persons of the similar role have been granted bail by this Court. 7. 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. 8. 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. 8. 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. 9. The Bail Application is allowed. 10. Let the applicant – Rahul alias Krishna Singh be released on bail on his executing 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 previous permission of the Trial Court. 11. It is clarified that if the applicant misuses or violates any of the conditions, imposed upon him, the prosecution agency will be free to move the court for cancellation of bail.