In the case of Anupam Thakur and others vs the State of Himachal Pradesh, a bail application was filed by the petitioners, who got arrested for being involved in a case of awarding fake degrees by a university. The bail was granted by the court after concluding that the petitioners would not be a menace in the investigation.
Facts of the Case
After the complainant saw an advertisement on the news of Manav Bharti University on television, she called the university for admission in M.A. Psychology. As per the instructions received on the call she went to Karnal for admission. The complainant went along with her friend who wanted to pursue LLB from the university as well.
They completed the admission formalities as instructed by the owner. After the admissions, they pursued their courses and got the degrees. The complainant got her university certificate verified by the university on 25.04.2012. Then, the complainant applied for the post of Assistant Employment Officer on 31.01.2013 and got selected for it.
On 07.05.2016 she lodged a General Diary Report and applied for a duplicate certificate as she had lost her certificate. The complainant, after full filling all the formalities, got the duplicate certificate. According to the complainant, the degree is fake and the university has done fraud with her by awarding her with a fake degree.
On the complaint made by Ms Mamta, the police started the investigation.
Further investigation
The investigation revealed that the university was awarding fake degrees.
The petitioners, Munish goel and Anupam Thakur, who worked at the university got arrested and interrogated. The petitioner, Anupam Thakur, used to give away fake degrees and collected the money. It was also discovered that both of the petitioners transported the records of Manav Bharti University, solan to Rajasthan where another branch of the same university was located.
The petitioner, Munish Goel, also stated that some staff members from Rajasthan branch of the university were shifted to Solan and used to make fake degrees for the university. Some records are still left for recovery as the investigation was sluggish due to the Coronavirus pandemic.
The issue was whether bail should be granted to the petitioners.
Petitioner’s Argument
The counsel for petitioners argued that the petitioners have nothing to do with the case as they were mere workers at the university and were not involved in committing the crime. It also stated that the petitioners are not in the state of hindering the investigation or evidence in any manner. The main culprit and the owner of the university Raj Kumar Rana, has fled and there is nothing to recover from the petitioners.
All the allegations were against the owner and not the petitioners. The counsel said that the petitioners will abide by the instructions of the court if they get the bail.
Respondent’s Arguments
The counsel for respondents pleaded that the petitioners should not get the bail as they were an active part of the case. It also said that if the petitioners are not under custody, they may disturb the investigation and manipulate evidence.
Court’s Observation
The investigation is slow due to coronavirus so, the petitioners should not be under custody until the investigation ends. The petitioners are not in the position of tampering the evidence. Also, as of now, custody of the petitioners is not relevant to the police.
Court’s Decision
The court decided that the petitioners will get the bail. However the petitioners have to adhere to the conditions ordered by the court for the bail.
Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgements from the court. Follow us on Google News, Instagram, LinkedIn, Facebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe for our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.
