TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (5) TMI 1050
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....shay Jain, Advocate in Crl. Misc. Nos. M-7607 and 7608 of 2013 and Mr. P.S. Ahluwalia, Advocate in Crl. Misc. No. M-7791 of 2013 For the Respondents : Mr. Gurinderjit Singh, DAG, Punjab JUDGMENT Paramjeet Singh, J. 1. This order shall dispose of Crl. Misc. No. M-38118 of 2012, M-3345 of 2013, M-4860 of 2013, M-5640 of 2013, M-6423 of 2013, M-7607 of 2013, M-7608 of 2013 and M-7791 of 2013 as they arise from the same FIR. The petitioners in the abovesaid petitions have approached this Court under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail in a case arising out of FIR No. 04 dated 21.7.2012 registered under Sections 409/ 420/ 467/ 468/ 471/ 120-B IPC and Sections 13(1)(d)/13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act at Police Stat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 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 t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....big scam. The Government officials in connivance with the contractors have caused a loss of more than Rs. 4.75 crores to the State exchequer. They have prepared forged and fabricated documents, vouchers and payment bills. As such they should not be released on bail as they may tamper with the evidence. I have considered the rival contentions raised by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the judgments cited at bar by the learned counsel for the petitioners. 8. The latest judgment cited by the learned counsel for the petitioners is of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Dipak Shubhashchandra Mehta (supra) wherein the entire law has been discussed. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in para No. 18 in Dipak Shubhashchandra Mehta's....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s Court has repeatedly held that when the undertrial prisoners are detained in jail custody to an indefinite period, Article 21 of the Constitution is violated. As posed in the Sanjay Chandra's case (supra) we are also asking the same question i.e. whether the speedy trial is possible in the present case for the reasons mentioned above. Further, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra (supra) has held as under:- 15. In the instant case, as we have already noticed that the "pointing finger of accusation" against the appellants is 'the seriousness of the charge'. The offences alleged are economic offences which has resulted in loss to the State exchequer. Though, they contend that there is possibili....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....served that "under the criminal laws of this country, a person accused of offences which are non-bailable, is liable to be detained in custody during the pendency of trial unless 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. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed on bail specially when they are already behind bars for about seven or more months. I do not see any good reason to continue the judicial custody of the petitioners that too after completion of investigation and submission of charge-sheets/supplementary charge-sheets. The conclusion of the trial will take long time and their presence in custody may not be necessary for further investigation. 12. In view of this, I am of the view that petitioners are entitled to grant of bail pending trial on stringent conditions in order to allay the apprehension of the investigating agency. It is not necessary to canvass and go into the details of various other issues canvassed by learned counsel for the parties and the cases relied upon by learned c....