Salig Ram vs. State Of Hp

Held

The Court allowed the bail applications. It noted that the applicants are permanent residents and their custodial interrogation was not sought. The Court found that while the PWD report indicated that most works were executed as per estimates, there was an issue with the measurement book (MB) record for one specific road (Serial No.3, Rogi Vahan Road). However, the Court considered that the allegations were primarily based on documentary evidence already seized by the police, and the documents yet to be obtained were not in the possession of the applicants. The Court emphasized that bail should not be used as punishment. Given that the applicants had joined the investigation and the investigation was at an initial stage, and considering the overall facts and circumstances, the Court found sufficient grounds to grant anticipatory bail. The interim orders were made absolute, and the applicants were released on bail subject to furnishing personal bonds and surety, along with standard bail conditions.

Facts

These are two bail applications filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, by Kamal Kumar and Salig Ram, apprehending arrest in FIR No.208 of 2025, registered under various sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, at Police Station Nalagarh, District Solan. The applicants, Pradhan and Secretary of Gram Panchayat Malehani, are accused of forgery in vendor registration and supply of construction material, leading to embezzlement of government funds. The complaint was filed by the Ex-Pradhan, alleging irregularities and financial impropriety. The police investigation revealed discrepancies in quotations, the use of a single GST number for different vendors, and vehicle registration numbers that did not match the alleged transportation of materials. Notably, the GSTIN provided was found to be non-existent.

Key Issues

1. Whether the applicants have made out a case for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the BNSS, considering the allegations of forgery, fabrication of documents, and embezzlement of government funds related to development works in Gram Panchayat Malehani. Arguments for the applicants: The applicants contend that the complaint is a counter-blast to a complaint they filed regarding financial irregularities by the previous Pradhan. They assert that work orders were floated after due advertisement, material was procured from the lowest bidder, and verified by a Junior Engineer, demonstrating no criminal intent. They claim the allegations are false and fabricated. Arguments for the respondent (State): The State argues that the investigation has revealed serious irregularities, including forged quotations, a non-existent GSTIN used by two different vendors, and discrepancies in vehicle registration numbers used for material transport. The police investigation is at an initial stage, and further verification is required. The State highlights that owners of vehicles stated to have transported the material have denied such use, and the GSTIN provided is fake, indicating connivance and embezzlement.