Allowed

Rajendra Kumar v. State of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand HC6 Dec 2021BA1/2837/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Uttarakhand allowed a bail application filed by Rajendra Kumar accused in a scholarship scam involving offences under IPC and the Prevention of Corruption Act. The court observed no reason to keep the applicant detained indefinitely. He was released on personal bond and two sureties.

What did the court decide?

The applicant Rajendra Kumar was released on bail on personal bond and two sureties with conditions to appear for interrogation and not tamper with witnesses.

Rajendra Kumar Vs State of Uttarakhand — Corruption | Uttarakhand HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

¶2

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA

¶3

6^th DECEMBER, 2021

¶4

FIRST BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2837 of 2021

¶5

Between:

¶6

Rajendra Kumar …Applicant

¶7

and

¶8

State of Uttarakhand. …Respondent

¶9

Counsel for the Applicant : Mr. Sanjay Kumar.

¶10

Counsel for the Respondent : Mr. S.S. Adhikari, learned Deputy Advocate General assisted by Mr. Balvinder Singh, learned Brief Holder for the State.

¶11

Hon’ble Alok Kumar Verma,J.

¶12

This Bail application has been filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail in connection with FIR No.53 of 2020, registered with Police Station Bajpur, District Udham Singh Nagar for the offence under Sections 409, 420, 466, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of IPC and Section 13 (1) (d) read with Section 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

¶13

2 . According to the FIR dated 19.02.2020, in the scholarship scam, in compliance with the order passed by

¶14

¶15

this Court in Writ Petition No.33 of 2019, Mr. G.B. Joshi, Inspector, was appointed as a member of the Special Investigation Team (SIT). After enquiry, he lodged an FIR against co-accused persons.

¶16

3 . Heard Mr. Sanjay Kumar, the learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. S.S. Adhikari, the learned Deputy Advocate General assisted by Mr. Balvinder Singh, learned Brief Holder for the State.

¶17

4 . Mr. Sanjay Kumar, the learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been implicated in this matter; he is not beneficiary of the said scheme; he has not received any scholarship amount; the applicant is in custody since 12.10.2021; he is a permanent resident of District Udham Singh Nagar and two co-accused persons have been granted bail by this High Court.

¶18

5 . Mr. S.S. Adhikari, the learned Deputy Advocate General has opposed the bail application. However, he submitted that it is not clear at this stage of the investigation whether any of the scholarship amount was received by the applicant and if it was received, how much was received .

¶19

6 . 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 investigation is not punishment. The main purpose is manifestly to secure the attendance of the accused.

¶20

7 . Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties and in the facts and

¶21

¶22

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.

¶23

8 . The bail application is allowed.

¶24

9 . Let the applicant Rajendra Kumar 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 :-

¶25

i) the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by the Investigating Officer as and when requires;

¶26

ii) the applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of this case;

¶27

10 . 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.

¶28

ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J.

¶29

Dated: 06^th December, 2021 Neha

Rajendra Kumar v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajendra Kumar v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anil Kumar Ojasvi Vs State of Uttarakhand

Anil Kumar Ojasvi Vs State of Uttarakhand

Gursimran Singh Chadha Vs State of Uttarakhand

Deepa Joshi Vs Saurabh Joshi

Rajendra Kumar Vs State of Uttarakhand

Rajendra Kumar Vs State of Uttarakhand