TMI Blog2013 (5) TMI 1050X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him to disclose such facts to the Court or to any other authority. b) They shall remain present before the Court on the dates fixed for hearing of the case. If they want to remain absent, then they shall take prior permission of the court and in case of unavoidable circumstances for remaining absent, they shall immediately give intimation to the appropriate court and also to the State Vigilance Bureau and request that they may be permitted to be present through the counsel. c) They will not dispute their identity as the accused in the case. d) They shall surrender their passport, if any (if not already surrendered), and in case, they are not a holder of the same, they shall swear to an affidavit. If they have already surrendered before the trial Court, that fact should also be supported by an affidavit. e) I reserve liberty to the State Vigilance Bureau to make an appropriate application for modification/recalling this order, if for any reason, the petitioners violate any of the conditions imposed by this Court. - Paramjeet S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... th Sections 13(1)/13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. 3. During investigation of the case other persons, namely, contractors Paras Ram, Basant Singh, Anil Kumar and Jaswinder Singh etc. were nominated as accused. 4. The investigation in this case has been completed and challan has been presented and some of the subsequently nominated accused are yet to be arrested. Heard. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that petitioners, namely, Anil Kumar, Jaswinder Singh Thekedar, Joginder Singh Sidhu, Satpal Bansal, Khushwant Singh Kahrbanda, Basant Singh, Paras Ram and Sarabjit Singh are behind bars since 19.9.2012, 19.9.2012, 25.7.2012, 19.9.2012, 31.1.2013, 19.9.2012, 19.9.2012 and 17.9.2012, respectively. Different roles have been attributed to the petitioners in the case. Learned counsel for the petitioners vehemently contended that although there are allegations against the petitioners of being involved in economic offence of huge magnitude, we cannot lose sight of the fact that investigation agency has completed the investigation and charge-sheets have been submitted and even the supplementary charge-sheets have been submitted. Petitioners are i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... indicate in such orders reasons for prima facie concluding why bail was being granted, particularly, where the accused is charged of having committed a serious offence. The Court granting bail has to consider, among other circumstances, the factors such as a) the nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence; b) reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witness or apprehension of threat to the complainant and; c) prima facie satisfaction of the court in support of the charge. In addition to the same, the Court while considering a petition for grant of bail in a non-bailable offence apart from the seriousness of the offence, likelihood of the accused fleeing from justice and tampering with the prosecution witnesses, have to be noted. Considering the present scenario and there is no possibility of commencement of trial in the near future and also of the fact that the appellant is in custody from 31.03.2010, except the period of interim bail, i.e. from 15.09.2011 to 30.11.2011, we hold that it is not a fit case to fix any outer limit taking note of the materials collected by the prosecution. This Court has repeatedly he ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s he is enlarged on bail in accordance with law. Such detention cannot be questioned as being violative of Article 21 of the Constitution, since the same is authorized by law. But even persons accused of non-bailable offences are entitled to bail if the Court concerned comes to the conclusion that the prosecution has failed to establish a prima facie case against him and/or if the Court is satisfied by reasons to be recorded that in spite of the existence of prima facie case, there is need to release such accused on bail, where fact situations require it to do so. 9. In Sanjay Chandra's case (supra) also the Hon'ble Supreme Court has considered the entire law on the subject. 10. I am conscious of the fact that serious allegations of connivance and causing financial loss to the State exchequer have been leveled against the petitioners. There are also allegations of dishonesty, forgery, cheating and charges under various Sections of IPC and Prevention of Corruption Act have been leveled. However, if the petitioners are allowed to be kept in judicial custody for indefinite period then Article 21 of the Constitution is violated. It is the fundamental right of every pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
