MOHAN LAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that on June 25, 2007 a written report was lodged at Police Station Nayapura Kota by Rajendra Kumar, Jr. Accountant Small Saving Office, Kota that the agent Pushpa Jain, while she was working as authorised agent of Postal Department obtained bogus business certificate and by which she damaged very badly to the postal department along with other co-accused persons. The report was registered as FIR No. 242/2007. In the year 2007 the department declare a scheme that a cooler is to be given to the highest business doing person in Small Savings. Smt. Pushpa Jain submitted a statement of very huge amount of Rs. 62,03,000/- for getting the benefits of that scheme and the department asked her to submit the verified documents from the respective post offices vide letter dated 20.1.2007 but she failed to do so then department made enquiry through accused petitioner who submitted his report on 9.3.2007 that investment of Rs. 62,03,000 through Pushpa Jain is not verified in Sub Post Office, Gumanpura, Vigyan Nagar, Head Post Office New Grain Mandi and it was informed that in Sub Post Office Industrial State Smt. Pushpa Jain did not do any business. The petitioner also suggested that agent should have been asked to furnish detailes of her business regarding post office/bank, investment date, amount, type of securities invested for further detailed inquiry in this matter. During the course of investigation accused petitioner was arrested by the investigating agency and since then he is behind the bar. The allegations against the accused petitioner is that he along with the other officials in the Small Saving Department facilitated Smt. Pushpa Jain and revenue worth Rs. 7,86,311 was obtained by her in cash including gold and silver and wrist watches. In this manner the accused petitioner being co-accused facilitated Smt. Pushpa Jain to draw lacs of rupees from the Postal Department by forged documents.

(3.) NOW this third bail application has been filed by the accused petitioner on 3.3.2011. The learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the statements of 15 witnesses have been recorded and there remain more than 30 witnesses to be examined by the trial Court which would take another couple of years. It was further contended that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since long and hence it was requested that he should be released on bail.