SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Raj) 2322

IN THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
KULDEEP MATHUR, J.
Sushil Kumar - Petitioner
Versus
Union of India - Respondent
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 1529 of 2023, Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 1470 of 2023, S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 1530 of 2023.
Decided on : 01-09-2023

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For Petitioners:Mr. H.S. Shekhawat, Mr. Sanjay Mathur, Mr. Chakravarti Singh Rathore, Advocate.
For Respondents: Mr. Mukesh Rajpurohit, Dy.S.G. with Mr. Anda Ram Choudhary, PP.

Headnote:(A) Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(a) - Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 439 - Bail application - Petitioners charged with financial fraud and misusing official position - Total embezzlement of Rs.52,00,000/-; investigation completed with challan filed - Court allows bail considering likelihood of prolonged trial and judicial custody without needing further custodial interrogation. (Paras 1, 2, 6, 8)

(B) Legal Standards for Bail - The court held that even serious charges do not necessarily preclude bail, especially when investigation is complete, underscoring the principle of liberty during pending trials. (Paras 6 and 8)

Facts of the case:
The petitioners, while at different post offices from April 2020 to January 2022, forged deposit receipts to show non-existent deposits, leading to a significant financial loss. The petitioners claimed they were falsely implicated and sought bail due to completed investigation and prolonged trial.

Findings of Court:
The court observed the seriousness of the charges but ultimately granted bail, emphasizing the absence of need for further custodial interrogation and completion of investigation.

Issues: The primary issues included whether the severity of the charges warranted denial of bail and if extended judicial custody was justifiable given the completed investigation.

Ratio Decidendi: The court reasoned that the completion of the investigation and the ongoing custody should allow for bail consideration, balancing the rights of the accused with the nature of the allegations.

Result: Bail applications allowed.

Table of Content
1. accusations of financial fraud and embezzlement. (Para 1 , 2)
2. arguments on the need for and against bail. (Para 3 , 4)
3. court's examination of trial circumstances. (Para 5 , 6)
4. decision to grant bail without prejudice. (Para 7)
5. formalization of bail order and procedural instructions. (Para 8 , 9)

ORDER :

Mr. Kuldeep Mathur, J. - These applications for bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. have been filed by the petitioners who have been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.RC0312022A0001 (CNR No.RCJDH2022A0001) registered at Special Police Station A.C.B, Jodhpur, for the offences punishable under Sections 120B, 420, 467, 468 471 and 477A of IPC and Sections 13 (2) read with section 13(1)(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (As amended in 2018).

2. As per prosecution, the petitioners while holding different positions at Post Offices at Mawli, Gadoli and Bhimal from 18.04.2020 to 04.01.2022, showed deposits of money to the tune of Rs.16,40,47,490/- in SBI, Mawli Bank Account Nos.51039634795 and 51039634808, without actually depositing the money, by creating forged deposit receipts. The petitioners deposited the amount so embezzled in multiple forged/fake Post Office Saving Bank (POSB) Accounts in their own names and in the names of their family members and relatives. The allegation against the petitioners is that through this modus operandi, they have embezzled a sum of Rs.52,00,000/- and caused huge financial loss to the post offices and its customers.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in a criminal case. The challan against the petitioners has already been filed before the competent criminal court. As such, their custodial interrogation is not required now. The petitioners are in judicial custody and the trial of the case is likely to consume sufficiently long time. On these grounds, he implored the Court to grant indulgence of bail to the petitioners.

4. Per contra, learned Dy. Solicitor General, Union of India has vehemently opposed the bail applications and submitted that the petitioners have committed a financial fraud by misusing their official position, therefore, they do not deserve to be enlarged on bail.

5. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Dy. S.G. and perused the challan papers filed by the investigating agency before the competent criminal court.

6. Having considered the rival submissions, facts and circumstances of the case, this Court prima facie finds that though the petitioners have been charged for causing huge financial loss to the government exchequer by misusing their official position and the offences allegedly committed by them is of very serious nature but, at the same time, this Court cannot lose sight of the fact that the investigating agency has already completed the investigation qua the petitioners and challan has been filed before competent criminal court. The petitioners are in judicial custody and the possibility of trial being concluded against them in near future is very bleak.

7. In view of the above but, without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail.

8. Consequently, these bail applications under Section 439 Cr.P.C. are allowed. It is ordered that the accused-petitioners (1) Sushil Kumar S/o Sh. Badri Prasad Prajapat, (2) Kishan Lal Meghwal S/o Sh. Pema Ram and (3) Ratan Lal Gawaria S/o Sh. Sita Ram Gawaria arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.RC0312022A0001 (CNR No.RCJDH2022A0001) registered at Special Police Station A.C.B, Jodhpur, shall be released on bail, if not wanted in any other case, provided each of them furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each, to the satisfaction of learned trial court, for their appearance before that court on each & every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till completion of the trial.

9. A copy of this order be placed in each file.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top