ORDER

Date : 22-04-2022 Heard Mr. N. Pada, learned counsel for the accused and also Mr. O. Pada, learned counsel SIC (Vigilance).

This is a second bail application preferred by the accused Shri Tasi Messar, who is languishing in jail Hazot, in connection with SIC (Vigilence) Case No. 01/2021, since 11.03.2022. The allegations against him is that while he was serving as Executive Engineer at RWD, Kaying Division, Pangin Sub-Division, construction of road from Komsing to Sissen under PMGSY project was executed and a sum of Rs.35,57,34,150/- (Thirty Five Crore fifty seven lakh thirty four thousand one hundred fifty only) was sanctioned for construction of 40.35 Km vide package No. AIR/04/02/033 and the said work was executed by the Officer of RWD, Kaying Division, Pangin Sub-Division, in collision of M/s Ragiaku Enterprises with non-adherence to specification in DPR in a sub-standard manner and out of total length of 40.35 Km, who ought to have been constructed, the contractor has constructed only 33.3 KM and there is shortage of 7.5 Km. On receipt of one FIR to this effect from Nugong Banggo Kebang (NBK) on 13.01.2020, the Officer-In-Charge SIC (Vigilance) P.S has registered above noted Case and carried out the investigation.

It is also appears that vide order dated 08.04.2022, bail petition for the accused Shri Tasi Messar was rejected after perusing the Case Diary.

This subsequent bail application is preferred on the ground that the wife of the accused is suffering from some ailments and she has been referred to Christian Medical College, Vellore.

Mr. N. Pada, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the accused Shri Tasi Messar, being only male member of the family, has to take the wife to Vellore and therefore, Mr. Pada has submitted that on the medical ground and also considering the fact and investigation has already been completed, the accused may be enlarge on bail.

Mr. O. Pada, learned Standing Counsel SIC (Vigilance) submits that there is money trial against the accused and his bail petition was rejected after perusing the Case Diary and that from the medical documents enclosed with the petition, it cannot be ascertained in what kind of disease the wife of the accused is suffering from. However, Mr. Pada, opposed the petition on account of availability of the materials against him and he produced the Case Diary before this Court.

Having heard the submission of learned Advocates of both sides, I have carefully gone through medical documents enclosed with the petition and from the perusal of the documents, it cannot be ascertained the disease in which the wife of the accused is suffering from. Though, it appears that she has been referred to Christian Medical College Hospital, Vellore. To a pointed query of this Court, the learned counsel for the petitioner also pleaded ignorance about the disease the wife of the accused is suffering from. It is also submitted that he also could not read the medical term use by the Doctor in the documents enclosed with the petition.

Considering the submission of learned Advocates of both sides and also considering the documents enclosed with the petition, this Court left unconvinced that the wife of the accuse is suffering from any serious kind of aliment requiring urgent medical attention. In view of the above and also considering the nature and gravity of the offence and also in view of the material collected so far in the Case Diary, in support of the allegation made in the FIR this Court is of the view that this is not a fit Case where a privilege of bail can be extended to the accused.

Accordingly, the petition is rejected.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant