- (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 at Police Station Nayapura Kota by Rajendra Kumar, Jr. Accountant Small Saving Office, Kota that the agent Pushpa Jain, 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 report was registered as FIR No. 242/2007. In the year 2007 the department declare a scheme that a cooler is to be given to the highest business doing person in Small Savings. Smt. Pushpa Jain submitted a statement of very huge amount of Rs. 62,03,000/- for getting the benefits of that scheme and the department asked her to submit the verified documents from the respective post offices vide letter dated 20.1.2007 but she failed to do so then department made enquiry through accused petitioner who submitted his report on 9.3.2007 that investment of Rs. 62,03,000 through Pushpa Jain is not verified in Sub Post Office, Gumanpura, Vigyan Nagar, Head Post Office New Grain Mandi and it was informed that in Sub Post Office Industrial State Smt. Pushpa Jain did not do any business. The petitioner also suggested that agent should have been asked to furnish detailes of her business regarding post office/bank, investment date, amount, type of securities invested for further detailed inquiry in this matter. During the course of investigation accused petitioner was arrested by the investigating agency and since then he is behind the bar. The allegations against the accused petitioner is that he along with the other officials in the Small Saving Department facilitated Smt. Pushpa Jain and revenue worth Rs. 7,86,311 was obtained by her in cash including gold and silver and wrist watches. In this manner the accused petitioner being co-accused facilitated Smt. Pushpa Jain to draw lacs of rupees from the Postal Department by forged documents. 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 earning of the charge. The trial Court framed charge against the accused petitioner for the offences under Sections 420 and 120 B IPC . The Sessions Judge, Kota vide his order dated 18.1.2010 rejected the bail application of the accused petitioner. Thereafter the petitioner filed a second bail application before this Court on 20.1.2010. This Court vide order dated 28.1.2010 rejected the second bail application No. 1018/2010 on the ground that the accused petitioner is co-accused in a conspiracy drawing more than rupees one crore of the department and directed the trial Court to complete the trial within a period of six months, if possible. The accused petitioner filed a fresh bail application before the Sessions Judge Kota and the Sessions Judge Kota, vide order dated 18.2.2011 rejected the bail application observing as under: JUDGEMENT_1429_RAJLW2_2012Image1.jpg
(3.) NOW this third bail application has been filed by the accused petitioner on 3.3.2011. The learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the statements of 15 witnesses have been recorded and there remain more than 30 witnesses to be examined by the trial Court which would take another couple of years. It was further contended that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since long and hence it was requested that he should be released on bail. The Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application and stated that the accused petitioner facilitated Smt. Pushpa Jain, who cheated postal department and obtained lacs of rupees showing forged documents, in these circumstances the accused petitioner is not entitled for any sympathy from this Court. There is no change in circumstance and hence the accused petitioner is not entitled to be released on bail at this stage.;