Mukesh Saini vs State Of Uttarakhand

Alok Kumar Verma, J

Present Application has been filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail in connection with the Case Crime No.259 of 2023, registered at police station Kotwali Manglaur, District Haridwar.

Applicant is in judicial custody under Section 420, Section 120B read with Section 511 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 12(2) of the Uttarakhand Competitive Examination (Measures for Control and Prevention of Unfair Means in Recruitment) Act, 2023.

Learned counsel for the State has opposed the Bail Application. He submits that as per the prosecution case, the informant Pradeep Kumar Rana, Inspector, received a secret information on 08.04.2023 at about 14:00 hrs. that accused Mukesh Saini, owner of M.S. Career Coaching Centre, located at Ganeshpur, Roorkee, and, M.S. Career Coaching Centre, located at Gurukul Narshan, is planning to provide undue assistance and distributing Bluetooth devices to some candidates appearing in the examination of Forest Guard Van Rakshak Examination, 2023 to be held on 09.04.2023. On the said information, police party raided the spot. Present applicant and the co-accused Rachit Pundir were arrested. Several Bluetooth devices and Rs.1,20,000/- were recovered from the Coaching Centre of the applicant.

Upon conclusion of the investigation, charge-sheet was filed.

Mr. Pranav Singh, Advocate, submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present matter. Prosecution has not mentioned any specific details of Bluetooth devices. The alleged recovered Bluetooth devices were not sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory for examination. The result of the aforesaid examination has already been declared and till date no complaint has been lodged by the Authority, Uttarkhand Public Service Commission, by which the said examination has been conducted. Applicant is in custody since 08.04.2023. He is a permanent resident of District Haridwar, therefore, there is no possibility of his absconding. Charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence.

During the arguments, Mr. Pramod Tiwari, learned Brief Holder for the State, has fairly admitted that the recovered Bluetooth devices were not sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory, the result of the said examination has already been declared, and, no complaint has been received from the Public Service Commission.

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

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

The Bail Application is allowed.

Let the applicant- Mukesh Saini 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 :-

i) Applicant shall attend the Trial Court regularly and he shall not seek any unnecessary adjournment;

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

It is clarified that if the applicant misuses or violates any of the conditions, imposed upon him, prosecution will be free to move the court for cancellation of bail.