Don't Deny Bail to Accused as a Lesson, Says Allahabad High Court

In the case of Maya Tiwari vs. State of U.P., the Allahabad High Court ruled that bail should not be denied to an unconvicted person just to make them experience imprisonment or to show disapproval of their conduct. Justice Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal highlighted that when deciding on bail, the court should focus on whether the accused is likely to flee, tamper with evidence, or intimidate victims or witnesses, along with the seriousness of the charges and possible punishment.

This ruling was made while hearing the bail plea of Maya Tiwari, who was charged under several sections of the Indian Penal Code and the IT Act for allegedly being involved in a fraud scheme related to fake tenders for the One Nation, One Ration Card scheme. Tiwari, who was arrested in October of the previous year, was accused of working with a gang that issued fake tenders in the name of a deputy secretary of the ministry.

Tiwari sought bail, arguing that while Rs. 10,00,000 was transferred to her and her family's accounts, Rs. 8,70,000 was returned to the first informant. She also claimed to have already paid back more than the agreed amount and stated that she was a victim of the main accused, Santosh Kumar Semwal, who allegedly created a fake work order from the PMO, which she unknowingly forwarded to the first informant.

Tiwari's lawyer also referred to the Supreme Court's ruling in Manish Sisodia vs Directorate of Enforcement, where it was established that keeping someone in jail for a long period during trial is not appropriate and that bail should not be used as punishment. Tiwari argued that since her co-accused had already been granted bail, she should also be released.

The state's lawyer, however, argued that the fake work order was sent from Tiwari's WhatsApp number, and Rs. 10,00,000 was transferred to her and her family's accounts. She was also accused of posing as a high-ranking officer from the PMO.

The court, referring to the Manish Sisodia case, noted that keeping Tiwari in jail for the entire trial period without any charges framed yet, and with no early conclusion in sight, would be unjust. The court found that the prosecution did not claim Tiwari was a flight risk, or that she would tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses. Given that her co-accused had been granted bail and she had been in jail since October, the court allowed her bail, stating that denying it would be a violation of Article 21 of the Constitution, which guarantees personal liberty.