Point of law : Economic offences constitute a class apart and need to be visited with a different approach in the matter of bail. The economic offence having deep rooted conspiracies and involving huge loss of public funds needs to be viewed seriously and considered as grave offences affecting the economy of the country as a whole and thereby posing serious threat to the financial health of the country.

JUDGMENT :

1. By way of the present application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, applicant has prayed to release him on regular bail in connection with the FIR registered being I-C.R No.11821008200746 of 2020 before Dahod Rural Police Station, District: Dahod for the offence punishable under Sections 406, 420, r/w. 120B of IPC and Section 66(d) of I.T.Act as well as Sections 13(1)(a) and 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

2. Learned advocate for the applicant has submitted in his arguments that applicant is not a Government servant/public servant and there is no allegations or iota of evidence that the applicant has taken any pecuniary benefit from the amount which was directly disbursed to the farmers. It is further submitted that no offence punishable under Section 13(1)(a) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 is established by the prosecution. That, while implementing PM Kisan Yojna, the amount of relief could only be credited to the accounts of farmers after scrutiny and sanction from the Taluka and District Level, Government Officials. That, in order to shield the Government Officials, the applicant and co-accused are made scapegoat. That, there are no ingredients of the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code. That, the applicant has not assured any official for his favour or demanded any gratification from the farmers. That, even if the allegations levelled against the applicant is believed to be true than also it was contractual relationship between the applicant and farmers for filling up forms for which the applicant used to charge nominal fees. That, nothing is recovered or discovered from the applicant except the mobile phone and laptop. That, the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution nor he has played any role in the commission of any alleged offence. That, the FIR do not satisfy ingredients of any of the offences as alleged. That, the appliant undertakes to co-operate with the investigation and make himself available as and when his presence is required. Hence, it was requested by learned advocate appearing for the applicant to enlarge the applicant on regular bail with suitable conditions.

3. Per contra, learned APP appearing for the respondent-State has stronlgy objected the arguments advanced by learned advocate for the applicant and submitted that the complainant himself is a Government official working with the District Panchayat as Agriculture Officer. As per the case of the prosecution, the accused persons, in connivance with each other, had created the bogus and forged application of agriculturist and obtained financial benefit in terms of Rs.2000/- of each applicant, as per the scheme of the Central Government namely PRADHANMANTRI KISAN SAMMAN NIDHI YOJNA. That, out of 32717 persons, 1191 persons have got the financial benefits which comes to Rs. 23,82,000/- . That, active participation was made by the present applicant in committing an offence and therefore, after completion of investigation, investigating agency had submitted the chargesheet on 10.6.2021 before the competent court wherein, present applicant is placed at accused No.3 in the charge-sheet. That, during the investigation, it was found that total amount of fraud was reached to Rs. 9,06,24,000/-. Learned APP has requested to consider the affidavit of the Investigating Officer produced on record. That, the applicant is having close association with the prime accused no.1 Mayur, who was working as District Level Enterpreneur DLE-District Panchayat, because of his position as District Level Enterpreneur, the accused No.1 had wrongfully got the digital user ID, for which he can directly submit an application, by passing one stage of verification at the Taluka level. That, by misusing 3 master digital user ID, the accused No.1 had created bogus 78 user ID and the same were given to the other accused persons, by which various appl