- (1.) Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. Perused the record. Submission of the counsel for the applicant is that the controversy revolves around the appointment and regularization of one lady Smt. Sadhna Tiwari on the post of Junior Clerk in one institution Arya Kanya Inter College, Jhansi, for which it is alleged that her appointment was done by backdating the appointment letter as well as consent letter without following the provisions of Adhinasth Karyalaya Lipik Vargiya Karmchari Warg (Sidhi Bharti) Niyamawali, 1985, without any advertisement, without constituting any selection committee and without following any process of appointment and also without calling even the application form. Further submission is that the F.I.R. was lodged by C.B.C.I.D. on 03.12.2009 against said lady Smt. Sadhna Tiwari, her husband Mr. Shyam Sundar Tiwari, Senior Clerk in the Zonal Office of Deputy Director (Secondary Education) and the present applicant who was erstwhile Authorized Controller of the institution in question namely Arya Kanya Inter College, Jhansi for the incident dated 5.11.1997 which is the date of appointment letter. It is further submitted that the F.I.R. itself contains the allegation against Mr. Shyam Sundar Tiwari and Smt. Sadhna Tiwari to the effect that Mr. Shyam Sundar Tiwari taking benefit of his post as Senior Clerk in the concerned department had procured the appointment letter dated 05.11.1997 and had managed the process of its approval and also managed the disappearance of relevant record/file in order to extend illegal benefit to her wife Smt. Sadhna Tiwari in collusion with each other. It is also submitted that the F.I.R. contains allegation against the present applicant to the effect that the applicant being Authorized Controller had sent a letter on 11.03.1998 to the Zonal Deputy Director (Secondary Education), Jhansi about two vacancies of the post of clerk in the institution in question. Learned counsel has further submitted that after investigation, the Investigating Officer concluded that for alleged commission of crime in question, most of the acts have been committed by Smt. Sadhna Tiwari and her husband Mr. Shyam Sundar Tiwari, however, while closing the conclusion, the Investigating Officer has held the present applicant also guilty along with above named two persons. Surprisingly the charge sheet no.1/2014 dated 20.06.2014 has been submitted only against the present applicant on the pretext that sanction for prosecution has been refused by the competent authority in respect of other two co-accused persons namely Smt. Sadhna Tiwari and Mr. Shyam Sundar Tiwari. Submission is that the applicant has been made an escape goat, while no action has been taken against those two principal offenders who in fact committed the alleged offences and are the real beneficiaries of the whole controversy. Counsel has also tried to show that in fact the aforesaid two persons themselves duped the applicant who despite his bonafides and innocence fell prey to the deceit played upon him by them. The facts and circumstances of the case are such that the applicant cannot be in justice saddled with any criminal intention on his part. It has been pointed out that the applicant is a retired government officer and is aged about 69 years having a neat and clean service record throughout his career and has retired peacefully on 30.9.2006. Further submission is that in fact the present applicant is being victimized in the criminal case in question who has lost his wife in year 2011 due to serious illness and also his young son in year 2004 and he is languishing in jail since 16.7.2015. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. It has also been submitted that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial.
(2.) Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail.
(3.) After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the bar and after taking an overall view of all the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence, the period of detention already undergone, the unlikelihood of early conclusion of trial and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail. Let the applicant-Ram Asrey Nirmal, involved in Case Crime No.1620 of 2009, u/s 409, 201, 120-B of IPC & 13(1)(d) r/w 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, P.S.-Sipri Bazar, District-Jhansi be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned on the following conditions :- (1) The applicant will not make any attempt to tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner whatsoever. (2) The applicant will personally appear on each and every date in the court and his personal presence shall not be exempted unless the court itself deems it fit to do so in the interest of justice. It may be observed that in the event of any breach of the aforesaid conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to proceed for the cancellation of applicant's bail.;