In cases of disproportionate assets, the delay in FIR registration and the nature of evidence (documentary) can justify bail, especially when health and family circumstances are considered.

Judgment

Mr. Vikas Bahl, J.

This order will dispose of two petitions i.e. CRM-M-56328- 2023 filed by Satkar Kaur Gehri and CRM-M-63520-2023 filed by Jasmail Singh under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail in case FIR No.23 dated 18.09.2023 (Annexure P-1) under Sections 13(1)B and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter to be referred as “the 1988 Act”) and under Section 120-B of Indian Penal Code, 1860 registered at Police Station Vigilance Bureau Range Ferozepur, District Ferozepur.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND:-

2. Brief facts of the present case are that FIR No.23 dated 18.09.2023 (Annexure P-1) was registered under Sections 13(1)B and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and under Section 120-B of Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Police Station Vigilance Bureau Range Ferozepur, District Ferozepur by Gurmeet Singh, PPS against both the petitioners who have filed two separate regular bail applications, on the allegations that in pursuance of Vigilance Enquiry No.2 of 2023 carried out with respect to period from 01.04.2017 to 31.03.2022 to check the creation of wealth beyond the known sources of the petitioner-Satkar Kaur Gehri, Former MLA Ferozepur, it was found that during the check period, the said petitioner had income of Rs.1,65,34,053/- and the expenses incurred by her were Rs.4,49,19,831.14 and as such, it was found that excess expenditure incurred by the petitioner-Satkar Kaur Gehri was Rs.2,83,85,778.41 and she had thus, committed the offence under Sections 13(1)B read with Section 13(2) of the 1988 Act as amended by PC (Amendment) Act, 2018 and 120- B of IPC and had spent more money than her means and had purchased properties in her name and in the name of petitioner-Jasmail Singh who is her husband. In pursuance of the above, the abovesaid FIR has been registered. Both the petitioners were arrested on 18.09.2023 and thereafter, the challan/final report under Section 173(2) of Cr.P.C. had been prepared on 14.11.2023 (Annexure P-2 in CRM-M-63520-2023) and has been presented in the trial Court and the matter is now fixed for framing of the charges and there are 48 prosecution witnesses, out of which, none have been examined as yet. As per the challan, it has been alleged that income received by the petitioners during the check period was Rs.1,65,37,960/- and the expenditure incurred by the petitioners during the said period was Rs.4,33,78,427/-. It is further alleged that the value of the property of the petitioners at the time of the beginning of the check period was Rs.7,05,026.57/- and the same was Rs.21,10,312.98/- at the end of the check period and thus, disproportionate income/assets of the petitioners were stated to be to the tune of Rs.2,82,45,753.41/-. The petitioners had applied for the concession of regular bail before the Special Court, Ferozepur, which was rejected vide orders dated 13.10.2023 and 25.10.2023 and it is thereafter that the present petitions have been filed by the petitioners.

ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONERS:-

3. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner-Satkar Kaur Gehri and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner-Jasmail Singh have submitted that both the petitioners were arrested on 18.09.2023 and the investigation, in the present case, is complete and challan had been prepared on 14.11.2023 and has been presented in the Court and there are 48 prosecution witnesses, out of which, none have been examined as yet and thus, the conclusion of trial is likely to take time. It is further jointly submitted that the entire case is based on documentary evidence and the said documents are already in the custody of the Investigating Agency and most of the witnesses are official witnesses and thus, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioners in custody. It is further submitted that the petitioners have duly cooperated with the inquiry w