Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 1005 (HP)

Nitin v. State of Himachal Pradesh

2025-05-14

VIRENDER SINGH

body2025
JUDGMENT : Virender Singh, J. 1. Apprehending his arrest, in case FIR No.156 of 2024 dated 09.09.2024, (hereinafter referred to as the ‘FIR in question’), registered under Sections 420, 465 and 468 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘IPC’), with Police Station Boileuganj, District Shimla, H.P. applicant-Nitin has filed the present application, under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’). 2. By way of the present application, the applicant has sought the indulgence of this Court to direct the I.O/police of Police Station Boileuganj, to release him, on bail, in the event of his arrest, in the above-mentioned case/FIR. 3. According to the applicant, he is innocent person and has falsely been named as accused, in this case. 4. As per the applicant, he has no criminal antecedents and is ready to abide by any condition, imposed by this Court, in case, any direction is issued to the IO/police of Police Station Boileuganj, under Section 482 of BNSS. 5. The applicant is stated to be from a respectable family, having deep roots in the society. 6. The applicant has further asserted that he is the permanent resident of the address, as mentioned in the application. 7. On the basis of above facts, Mr. Hemant Kumar Thakur, Advocate, has given certain undertakings, on behalf of applicant, for which, the applicant is ready to abide by, in case, any direction is issued to the police/I.O., in this case. 8. On all these submissions, a prayer has been made to allow the bail application. 9. When, put to notice, police has filed the status report on 03.04.2025, disclosing therein, that on 09.09.2024, Mr. Vijay, Inspector, Post Office, Sub-Division Shimla (East), has submitted a complaint, disclosing therein, that the Department of Dak Bhawan, New Delhi has issued Notification No.17-21/2023-GDS dated 27.01.2023, for filling up the posts of Gramin Dak Sewak and in the said recruitment process, on the basis of the marks, obtained in the matriculation examination, Nitin (applicant) was selected as Gramin Dak Sewak: 9.1. After the selection of the applicant as Gramin Dak Sewak, his documents were sent for verification and it was reported, by the Directorate of Government Examinations, Chennai, that the same have not been issued by it, upon which, the appointment of Nitin (applicant) was cancelled and a prayer has been made to register the case against the applicant. 9.2. Subsequently, police registered the FIR in question and criminal machinery swung into motion. 9.3. During the investigation, requisite documents were taken into possession, including the printout of the online application form, filled by Nitin (applicant), his original Class X certificate, order of engagement, as well as, the termination order. 9.4. It has been mentioned in the status report that the applicant has submitted the forged certificate of Class X and got the job and caused financial loss to the State. 9.5. After perusing the status report, filed on 03.04.2025, interim protection was granted to the applicant, by directing him to join the investigation and the matter was adjourned for 09.04.2025. 9.6. On 09.04.2025, police has filed the supplementary status report, disclosing therein, that the applicant has joined the investigation. 9.7. It is the further stand of the police that during the investigation, it has come on record that one Kailash, S/o Asanand, R/o Mohalla Krishna Nagar, No.73, Rewari, Haryana, apprised the applicant, with regard to the advertisement of the posts in the Post Office, in which, jobs are given on the basis of 10th merit, without any test. The applicant allegedly paid Rs.20,000/- to the said person, who has provided him Class X certificate, which, he had uploaded at the time of filling up the application form. The applicant allegedly shown his ignorance, as to from where, said Kailash has obtained Class X certificate. 9.8. Lastly, it has been apprehended that the applicant is the resident of adjoining State i.e. Haryana and in case, the interim order is made absolute, he may not be available for the trial. 9.9. In the status report, which has been filed today, similar stand has been taken and it has been mentioned in the status report that the applicant has passed the matriculation examination, in the year 2018, from Haryana Board of School Education. Kailash, S/o Asanand, who had allegedly provided him Class X certificate, has expired on 26.08.2024. 9.9. In the status report, which has been filed today, similar stand has been taken and it has been mentioned in the status report that the applicant has passed the matriculation examination, in the year 2018, from Haryana Board of School Education. Kailash, S/o Asanand, who had allegedly provided him Class X certificate, has expired on 26.08.2024. The specimen signatures of the applicant were obtained by producing him, before the Court of learned ACJM-II, Shimla, on 08.04.2025. 9.10. As per the verification report, no other case is stated to have been found to be registered against the applicant. 10. On the basis of above facts, a prayer has been made to dismiss the application. 11. Heard. 12. As per the stand, taken by the police, the entire documentary evidence has been taken into possession. The applicant has joined the investigation and his specimen signatures have also been obtained by producing him before the competent Court of law. 13. The case of the prosecution is based upon the documentary evidence, which has been taken into possession. As such, no useful purpose would be served by dismissing the application, as, dismissal of the application would be nothing, but, remanding the applicant to judicial custody. 14. The police is not able to make out a case for custodial interrogation of the applicant, in this case. As such, the interim order, which has been passed in favour of the applicant, is liable to be confirmed. 15. Moreover, pre-trial punishment is prohibited under the law, as, the punishment can only be inflicted after the full-fledged trial. 16. The role, allegedly played by Nitin (applicant), in the alleged crime, would be proved during the trial. 17. The applicant is presumed to be innocent, till his guilt is proved by the prosecution, by leading cogent and convincing evidence. 18. So far as the objection, with regard to the applicant is the resident of adjoining State i.e. Haryana, is concerned, this fact cannot be taken as disadvantageous to the applicant, as, for securing the presence of the applicant, before the trial Court, reasonable conditions can be imposed upon him, in case, the interim order is made absolute. 19. Considering all these facts, this Court is of the opinion that the interim order, dated 03.04.2025, is liable to be confirmed. 19. Considering all these facts, this Court is of the opinion that the interim order, dated 03.04.2025, is liable to be confirmed. Consequently, interim order, dated 03.04.2025, is made absolute, subject to the following conditions:- a) That the applicant will join the investigation of the case, as and when, called for, by the Investigating Officer, in accordance with law; b) That the applicant will not leave India, without prior permission of the Court; c) That the applicant will not directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person, acquainted with the facts of the case, so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Investigating Officer or the Court; and d) That the applicant shall regularly attend the trial Court on each and every date of hearing and if prevented by any reason to do so seek exemption from appearance by filing appropriate application; 20. Any of the observations, made hereinabove, shall not be taken as an expression of opinion, on the merits of the case, as these observations, are confined, only, to the disposal of the present bail application. 21. The applicant is directed to move regular bail application, when chargesheet will be filed in the competent Court of law. 22. It is made clear that the respondent-State is at liberty to move an appropriate application, in case, any of the bail conditions, is found violated by the applicant.