- (1.) THE present application has been filed by the applicant-Anti Corruption Bureau, Rajasthan, Jaipur against the respondent-accused seeking cancellation of the temporary bail granted by the court vide order dated 16.11.11.
(2.) IT has been submitted by the learned Addl. Advocate General Mr. N.A. Naqvi for the applicant that the respondent-accused and his wife had concocted the medical papers for getting himself released on temporary bail. Referring to the documents annexed to the application, Mr. Naqvi has submitted that the Vice Principal of SMS Medical College, Jaipur acting on the photostat copy of the application filed by the wife of the accused, who is also co-accused in the offence registered against the accused, had constituted a Medical Board consisting of three doctors on 3.9.11, whereas the original application was being dealt by the Superintendent of SMS, Hospital, Jaipur. According to Mr. Naqvi the said doctors without examining the accused had given the opinion to permit the accused to consult the accused in AIIMS at Delhi for further treatment stating that he was suffering from locally advance Carcinoma Chick. The Principal & Controller of SMS Medical College had passed the office order on 9.9.11 relying upon the said recommendation of Medical Board permitting the accused to go to AIIMS, New Delhi for further treatment on the ground that he was suffering from locally advance Carcinoma Chick. Mr. Naqvi also submitted that the criminal complaint has already been filed against the doctors who are found involved in the said matter. Of course, he has fairly submitted that those documents were not submitted by the prosecution before the court when the order for temporary bail was passed. Mr. Naqvi has also relied upon the order passed by the coordinate Bench refusing to grant temporary bail after considering all the documents allegedly concocted by the concerned doctors at the instance of the accused, and urged to cancel the temporary bail granted to the accused. In the other hand, learned counsel Mr. Sodhi for the respondent-accused has submitted that the application for cancellation of bail is not maintainable, inasmuch as the accused was released on temporary bail for a period of one month from the date of his release, which order has not been implemented in view of the order of rejection of other bail applications in respect of other cases. He also submitted that he prosecution should have produced the alleged documents in the earlier application of the accused seeking temporary bail, and the same having not been filed, the present application as such would amount to review of the earlier order, which is not permissible. He also submitted that their being no ground for cancellation of temporary bail granted by the court, the present application deserves to be dismissed. Before adverting to the rival contentions raised by the learned counsels for the parties, it may be stated that this court earlier had allowed the bail application being No. 9728/11 vide order dated 16.11.11, releasing the respondent-accused on temporary bail for a period of one month from the date of his release on his furnishing the surety of Rs. One lac and personal bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court. As such this order has not been implemented as the respondent-accused is also involved in other case and his application seeking temporary bail has been dismissed by the coordinate Bench vide order dated 13.12.11 in Cr. Misc. Bail Application No. 11369/11.. It is pertinent to note that the coordinate Bench while dismissing the application of the accused for interim bail has directed as under :- However, if the accused petitioner wants to have second opinion from AIIMS, New Delhi at his own expenses, then the jail authorities would first obtain the record of the medical history of the accused petitioner from SMS Medical Hospital, Jaipur and submit the same to Cancer Department of AIIMS, New Delhi for consideration. In case any further treatment is recommended by the doctors at AIIMS, then the accused petitioner shall be taken to the New Delhi under police custody, on the date so fixed. The medical investigation and treatment, if any, of the accused petitioner at AIIMS, New Delhi shall be done under the supervision and control of a senior police officer of the rank of Additional Superintendent of Police, to be appointed by the Additional Director General of Police, Anti-Corruption Bureau, Jaipur. Though the said order was passed on 13.12.11, the respondent-accused has not expressed his desire to have second opinion from AIIMS, New Delhi and, therefore, even after a period of two months, no further action has been taken by him though permitted by the coordinate Bench. Since the earlier order passed by this court on 16.11.11 has been taken into consideration by the coordinate Bench while passing the subsequent order on 13.12.11 in Bail Application No. 11369/11 and also considered the present documents allegedly concocted by the doctors at the instance of the accused and his wife, as such the purpose of granting the application of the accused seeking temporary bail as per order dated 16.11.11 has already frustrated. It is true that the said order having not been implemented, it could not be said that the applicant had committed any breach of any condition of the order passed by the court warranting cancellation, nonetheless, in view of the allegations made in the application with regard to the documents, which have also been taken into consideration by the coordinate Bench for refusing to grant the temporary bail to the respondent-accused, the present application deserves to be allowed.
(3.) IN that view of the matter, the temporary bail granted by the court vide order dated 16.11.11. in Cr. Bail Application No. 9728/11 stands cancelled. The application stands allowed accordingly.;