2025:UHC:3409 HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA 05TH MAY, 2025 ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 162 of 2025 Raj Kumar and Another … Applicants Versus State of Uttarakhand and Others … Respondents Counsel for the Applicants : Mr. R.P. Singh, Advocate. Counsel for the Respondents : Mr. Pradeep Lohani, Brief Holder. Hon’ble Alok Kumar Verma,J. The present Application has been filed by the applicants seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.253 of 2020, registered at Police Station Gangnahar, Roorkee, District Haridwar under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468 and Section 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. 2. As per the First Information Report dated 14.06.2020, pursuant to a letter dated 17.04.2028 of the Secretary, Home, Uttarakhand Government, a Special Investigation Team was constituted in the scholarship scam matter. Sub-Inspector Bhanu Pratap Singh was appointed as a member of the said investigation team. He inquired the matter. He found 1 2025:UHC:3409 that a sum of Rs.24,83,550/- was released by the Social Welfare Department. Sub-Inspector Bhanu Pratap Singh found that some concerned persons never took admission in the institute. After inquiry, he lodged the First Information Report against the owner and the manager of Swami Vivekanand College of Education. 3. Heard Mr. R.P. Singh, learned counsel for the applicants and Mr. Pradeep Lohani, learned Brief Holder for the respondents. 4. Mr. R.P. Singh, Advocate, contended that the said institute, namely’ “Swami Vivekanand College of Education” was run by a trust, namely, “Imperial Education Trust”. Applicant no.1 was the Secretary and the applicant no.2 was the member of the said trust. They have been falsely implicated in the present matter. The total scholarship amount of Rs. Rs.24,83,550/- was provided to the said educational institution in the bank accounts of the students in the year, 2015-16 to 2016-17 by the District Social Welfare Officer, Haridwar. During the investigation, some concerned students had given the statements that they took admission in the said institute. Several students had given their affidavits to the effect that the Social Welfare Department had deposited the scholarship in 2 2025:UHC:3409 their bank accounts and they themselves withdrawn their scholarship. 5. Mr. R.P. Singh, Advocate, further contended that the applicants had filed a Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to quash the First Information Report. Applicants had deposited Rs.5,83,820/- before the concerned department in compliance with the order of the Court. Applicants were granted interim relief. All the relevant documents were taken by the Investigating Officer. The Investigating Officer has filed a charge-sheet against the applicants before the concerned Court, therefore, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence. Applicants do not have any criminal antecedents. 6. Mr. Pradeep Lohani, Brief Holder, on the other hand, opposed the anticipatory bail application. He submitted that as per the some students, they never took admission in the said institute and their educational documents were misused to show their admission in the institute and most of the students were unaware about their bank accounts opened in the bank. However, Mr. Pradeep Lohani, Brief Holder, submitted on instructions that the applicants do not have any criminal antecedents, and, since the charge- 3 2025:UHC:3409 sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no requirement of custodial interrogation. 7. Personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India is very precious fundamental right and it should be curtailed only when it becomes imperative according to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. 8. Having heard the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the present Application, filed for anticipatory bail, is allowed. It is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicants Raj Kumar and Arvind Kumar, they shall be released on anticipatory bail on executing a personal bond of Rs. 30,000/- and two reliable sureties, each of the like amount, by each one of them, to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer, subject to the following conditions:- (i) Applicants shall attend the trial court regularly and they shall 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; (iii) Applicants shall not leave the country without the previous permission of the trial court. 9. 9. It is made clear that if the applicants misuse 4 2025:UHC:3409 or violate any of the conditions, imposed upon them, the prosecution agency will be free to move the Court for cancellation of the anticipatory bail. ___________________ ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J. Dt: 05.05.2025 Shiv/ 5