2025:UHC:2400 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA 2nd APRIL, 2025 ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.279 of 2025 Sunita Choudhary and Another ..…Applicants Versus State of Uttarakhand ..…Respondent Counsel for the Applicants : Mr. Navneet Kaushik, Advocate. Counsel for the Respondent : Mr. G.S. Sandhu, Additional Advocate General. Hon’ble Alok Kumar Verma,J. The present Application has been filed by the applicants seeking anticipatory bail under Sections 409, 420, 120B and Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 in Case Crime No.167 of 2020 (Criminal Case No.11471 of 2021, CIS No.4605 of 2021), registered at Police Station S.I.D.C.U.L., District Haridwar. 2. As per the FIR, pursuant to the letter dated 17.04.2018 of the Principal Secretary, Home, a Special Investigation Team was constituted in the scholarship scam matter. Sub-Inspector Bhanu Pratap was appointed as a member of the said Special Investigation Team. The matter was enquired. After enquiry, an FIR was lodged against the owner and manager of D.R.P.M.E., 2025:UHC:2400 2 Saharanpur, Uttar Pradesh, D.C.E. College of Education, Saharanpur, Uttar Pradesh and Doon College Ganeshpur, Saharanpur (Uttar Pradesh). 3. Heard Mr. Navneet Kaushik, learned counsel for the applicants and Mr. G.S. Sandhu, learned Additional Advocate General for the State. 4. Mr. Navneet Kaushik, Advocate, contended that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present matter. The applicant no.1 was the treasurer of Dr. Rajendra Prasad Memorial Educational Society. The institutes in-question were running by the said Society. She never operated the bank accounts of the Institutes. Dr. Shiv Singh, the Director of the said Institutes, had opened accounts in the name of the applicant no.1 and the other teachers working in the Institutes without their knowledge and without their consent. The applicant no.2 never opened the bank accounts of the Institutes. He did not demand any money from the Social Welfare Department for distribution of the scholarship. He was employed as subordinate employee working under the supervision and administrative control of the director of the said institutes. The applicants had no authority to withdraw or disburse the amounts of scholarship. They never visited the bank for opening the accounts of the Institutes. 2025:UHC:2400 3 5. Objection has not been filed. 6. Mr. G.S. Sandhu, Additional Advocate General for the State has opposed the anticipatory bail application orally. 7. Mr. Navneet Kaushik, Advocate, for the applicants, has further submitted that interim relief was granted to the applicants in WPCRL No.2205 of 2020, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to quash the First Information Report. Applicants are not previous convicts. All the relevant documents are in the custody of the investigating officer, and, charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence. 8. Mr. G.S. Sandhu, Additional Advocate General for the State submitted on instruction that charge-sheet has already been submitted, hence, custodial interrogation of the applicants is not required. 9. 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. 10. Having heard the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view of the facts 2025:UHC:2400 4 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, Sunita Choudhary and Arvind Kumar Sharma, 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. 11. It is made clear that if the applicants misuse 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. Dated: 02.04.2025 Pant/