Excelsior Correspondent
Srinagar, May 24: After spending two and a half years in Jail, the Jammu and Kashmir High Court today granted bail to former chairman Board of Professional Entrance Examination (BOPEE), Mushtaq Peer, who was involved in 2013 infamous Common Entrance Test (CET) paper scam.
Justice Tashi Rabstan granted bail to former BOPEE chairman Mushtaq Ahmad Peer who was arrested in November 2013 in connection with a case FIR 24/13 for offences punishable under Section 420, 406, 201, 120B RPC read with Section 5(1) (d), 5(2) of J&K Prevention of Corruption Act. Peer is presently lodged in Central Jail Srinagar for last two and a half years.
Court granted him bail and directed that he be released on furnishing two surety bonds each in the sum of Rs 50 lakhs to the satisfaction of the Special judge, Anticorruption, Kashmir Srinagar. “Personal bond in the identical amount to the satisfaction of Superintendent Jail concerned”, court said.
Court while granting bail to Peer also directed him not to directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him to disclose such facts to the court or to any other authority.
Court also made it clear that he (Peer) shall not do anything directly or indirectly to influence the witnesses for the prosecution nor to tamper with the evidence to be adduced against him.
“The applicant shall remain present before the court on the dates fixed for hearing of the case, for any reason due to unavoidable circumstances for remaining absent he has to give intimation to the court and make a proper application for permission to be present through counsel”, court further directed.
Court also directed him to surrender his passport, if any, if not already surrendered before the court of Special Judge, Anticorruption, Kashmir, Srinagar, within one week and if he is not holder of the same, that fact should be supported by an affidavit. “In case he has already surrendered the passport that fact should be supported by an affidavit”, court said.
Court also directed him to stay at Srinagar and not leave the District Srinagar without prior permission of the High Court or the court of Special Judge Anticorruption, Kashmir, Srinagar.
Court granted liberty to respondents-State to make an appropriate application for modification/recalling of the present order, in case the applicant (Peer) violates any of the conditions imposed on him by the Court.
Respondents-State in its reply in opposition to the bail insisted that the investigation conducted reveals that applicant was Chairman of Board of Professional Entrance Examination (BOPEE) and as Chairman, BOPEE, he was sole custodian and trustee of the question papers for Common Entrance Test (CET) 2012 and was found to have abused his official position by making sale of question papers against consideration prior to conduct of examination and conferred undue benefit upon him and accused beneficiaries.
“The applicant is said to have dishonestly and fraudulently made available question papers alongwith answer key to his associate prior to conduct of examination, who in turn put the question papers on sale to accused beneficiaries which resulted in selection of undeserving candidates for MBBS course”, reads the reply of respondents.
Court while referring various judgments of Apex Court observed: “If an application for enlargement on bail is rejected, such rejection, it is well settled, will not preclude a person to file subsequent application for grant of bail in the event there is a change in the fact situation. In such cases if the circumstances then prevailing require that such person be released on bail, in spite of his earlier applications being rejected, the courts can do so”.
Court said that when the under-trial prisoners are detained in jail custody for an indefinite period, Article 21 of the Constitution is violated. “It is not in the interest of justice that accused should be in jail for an indefinite period till outcome of the case before the trial court”, court said.
“No doubt, the offence alleged against the applicant is a serious one that, by itself, should not deter this Court from enlarging the applicant on bail when the maximum number of witnesses has been produced before the trial court. Thus there is no serious likelihood of applicant, if released on bail, to interfere with the trial or tamper with evidence. I do not see any good reason to detain the applicant in custody, that too, after long two and half years, and having regard to the fact of the case that maximum number of witnesses have deposed their statement before the trial court”, reads the judgment.
Trending Now
E-Paper
Follow our WhatsApp channel