SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA1 No. 1365 of 2025 BA1 No. 1401 of 2025 BA1 No. 1588 of 2025 BA1 No. 1589 of 2025 BA1 No. 1590 of 2025 BA1 No. 1592 of 2025 BA1 No. 1714 of 2025 BA1 No. 1739 of 2025 Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. D.K. Sharma, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. D.C.S. Rawat, Ms. Shumayla Zafri and Ms. Lubhna Jahan, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Deepak Bhardwaj, learned Brief Holder for the State. 3. Mr. Saurabh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the complainant. 4. Since, all these bail applications arising out of the same FIR dated 05.03.2025 bearing crime number 70 of 2025, therefore, all the bail applications are being decided by a common order. 5. The applicants of all the bail applications, namely, Ashwani Kumar Rawat, Rajesh Budakoti, Manjeet Saini, Jeet Singh Patwal, Rakesh Mohan Tyagi, Virendra Kumar Khantwal, Mukesh Kumar Chaudhary and Ashok Kumar are praying for bail in reference to FIR dated 05.03.2025, bearing Case Crime/FIR No. 70 of 2025, registered at P.S. Kotdwar, District Pauri Garhwal wherein as many as 9 persons were implicated for the offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 IPC. On this FIR, on completion of investigation the charge sheet has been filed and all the persons, who are named in the FIR, and the applicants herein have been charge sheeted for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120B read with Section 34 IPC. 6. It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants herein are the employees of Garhwal Motor Owners Union Limited and one of the applicants, namely, Ashwani Kumar Rawat has been retired from the services on 31.08.2024. It is argued that based on the internal report of the department, an audit was done, and based on the audit report the FIR has been lodged. It is argued that there is no allegation of embezzlement rather the allegation relates to the irregularities in the disbursement of the payment. It is also argued that without initiating departmental proceedings, based on an audit report, the FIR has been lodged. It is further argued that internal inquiry report of the department also reveals that there is no such embezzlement and it is a case of irregularity in the disbursement of the amount. It is further argued that as per the internal inquiry report, though, the recommendation were made for initiation of lodging of the FIR and the recovery but no individual liability has been fixed by the Inquiry Committee. Apart from this, it is also argued that charge sheet has already been filed, and, as such, there is no need of custodial interrogation of the applicant, and all the offences in which charge sheet has been filed are triable by the Magistrate. It is further submitted that all the applicants are languishing in jail since 18.06.2025. It is also submitted that all the applicants have no previous criminal history. 7. On the other side, Mr. Saurabh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the complainant seriously opposed the bail application by submitting that huge amount of Rs. 2 crore were misappropriated by the applicants and the recommendation for criminal prosecution by lodging the FIR was made after full- fledged internal inquiry of department. Mr. Pandey also submits that even during investigation credible evidence have been collected by the concerned I.O. and that is the reason the charge sheet has been filed. On specific query whether department proceedings were initiated by the department, Mr. Pandey fairly submits that no such departmental inquiry was conducted but all these applicants, in fact, admits their guilt and that is the reason departmental proceedings was not initiated, though, no individual liability has been fixed by the Committee constituted by the Department. 8. On the other side, Mr. Deepak Bhardwaj, learned Brief Holder for the State submits that after collecting all credible evidence charge sheet has been filed. He has also not disputed this fact that the applicants have no previous criminal history and also submits that all the offences are triable by the Magistrate. 9. After hearing the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration that all the offences are triable by the Magistrate and charge sheet has been filed and the applicants are languishing in jail since 18.06.2025, this Court is of the view that all the applicants deserve for bail. 10. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, all the bail applications are allowed. 11. Let the applicants, namely, Ashwani Kumar Rawat, Rajesh Budakoti, Manjeet Saini, Jeet Singh Patwal, Rakesh Mohan Tyagi, Virendra Kumar Khantwal, Mukesh Kumar Chaudhary and Ashok Kumar be released on bail on executing personal bond by each one of them and furnishing two reliable sureties, by each one of them each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned. 12. It is made clear that after being released on bail all the applicants shall join the trial court proceedings. It is further made clear that grant of bail will not preclude the Department to initiate departmental inquiry for fixing the individual liability upon each of the applicants. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 16.10.2025 Parul