- (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.
(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that on June 25, 2007 a written report was lodged a*: Police Station Nayapura Kota that the accused petitioner while she was working as authorised agent of Postal Department obtained bogus business certificate and by which she damaged very badly to the postal department along with other co-accused persons. The accused petitioner was arrested on 12.9.2009. The allegation against the petitioner is that during the years 1999-2000 to 2002-2003 she cheated the postal department by showing forged documents and from various schemes drawn Rs. 8,45,959, 1303 gms. Gold and 57 wrist watches. The first bail application of the petitioner was rejected by this Court on November 11, 2009 after hearing both the parties. This court granted liberty to the petitioner to move regular bail application before the trial Court immediately after framing of the charge. The trial Court framed charge against the accused petitioner for the offence under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC. The Sessions Judge, Kota vide his order dated 25.1.2010 rejected the bail application of the accused petitioner. Thereafter the petitioner filed a second bail application before this court on 4.2.2010. This Court vide order dated 5.2.2010 rejected the second bail application No. 1428/2010 observing as under: "I have gone through the order passed by the Sessions Judge Kota dated January 25,2010 and the order framing charge against the accused petitioner by the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate. Since there are serious allegations against the accused petitioner of cheating postal department of lacs of rupees, gold worth lacs of rupees, and wrist watches by way of forged documents, at this stage, the accused petitioner is not entitled to be released on bail. The bail application is thus rejected. The trial court is directed to conclude the trial as early as possible." Thereafter the petitioner filed third bail application No. 8047/2010 before this court and the same was rejected on 4.10.2010, observing as under: JUDGEMENT_1427_RAJLW2_2012Image1.jpg
(3.) THEREAFTER the petitioner filed bail application before the Additional Sessions Judge No. 5 Kota and the Addl. Sessions Judge vide his order dated 19.1.2011 rejected the bail application of the accused petitioner on the ground that the case is at the stage of recording of the statements of the witnesses and the statements of five witnesses have already been recorded and hence there is no need to release the accused petitioner under Section 437(6) Cr.P.C. when there are serious allegations of embezzlement of lacs of rupees of postal department. Now the accused petitioner has filed this fourth bail application that after deciding third bail application there is no progress in the trial and the offence alleged against the accused is triable by magistrate and the petitioner is a women and in judicial custody since a long time and looking to her age she should be released on bail.;