Siri Krishan Dass vs State of Haryana

R.L. Anand, J.

Siri Krishan Dass and his son Man Mohan Singh are the applicants of Criminal Misc. No. 2276M of 2000, Anil Kumar, an I.A.S. Officer, presently working as VicePrincipal, Revenue Training Institute, Ambala, is the applicant of Criminal Misc. No. 2278M of 2000 and R.K. Garg is the applicant of Criminal Misc. No. 3057M of 2000, and all the four petitioners have filed the three petitions in this Court under Section 438 Cr.P.C. seeking the directions of this Court for the Investigating Officer that in the event of their arrest in F.I.R. No. 17 dated 31.12.1999, under Sections 406/409/420/467/468/471 and 120B I.P.C. and Section 13(1) of Prevention of Corruption Act registered in Police Station State Vigilance Bureau, Rohtak, they should be enlarged on bail.

The F.I.R. in this case has been registered against the four petitioners at the instance of Hari Chand, Inspector of State Vigilance Bureau, Rohtak, who wrote a letter to the S.H.O. concerned by stating as follows :

"Sir, It is submitted that one inquiry No. 7, dated 15.9.1999, Rohtak, was received from the Chief Secretary, Haryana, vide No. 21/3/992, BureauI, dated 9.9.1999. The same was registered and was received for inquiry. In the complaint, in addition to other allegations, following allegations were also there. In allegation No. 4, it was alleged that Siri Krishan Dass, the then Minister in the State Government of Haryana, got one industrial sector acquired by H.U.D.A. on GohanaRohtak road. Surrounding to this sector, Siri Krishan Dass owns a plots of land and one factory also. In the surrounding of the farm of Sethji, the work of laying sewerage and lights etc. was done by H.U.D.A. and special arrangements were made on the occasion of inauguration of the Kothi. In the construction of the khothi, there was special contribution by H.U.D.A. Rohtak because Sethji was Minister of Department of H.U.D.A. As per allegation No. 15, it was alleged that the Municipal Committee, Rohtak never called the elected Municipal Councillors. Rohtak Municipal Committee was made ineffective for the last three years. Elected Municipal Councillors were never called when the contracts were given and streets in the area of the Municipal Committee were repaired. Sethji and his sons got the works executed as per their wishes in the town. By committing irregularities, the Municipal Committee was caused loss of lacs of rupees. The initial inquiry was done by DSP Mohinder Singh and DSP Banwari Lal, State Vigilance Bureau, Rohtak. In the allegation No. 4, it was found that on RohtakGohana road near the milk plant, Seth Krishan Dass and his family owns 70 acres of land in the East where he has constructed his house and installed a factory in the name of his son. In the west of this land, H.U.D.A. acquired 130 acres of land for the Industrial Area, PhaseII, and adjacent to this and parallel to the road, Executive Engineer, H.U.D.A. is developing a green belt. From this, it is clear that they got the present land acquired in the name of Industrial sector so that the price of their own land may appreciate. Otherwise, no person likes to have an industrial area near his residential house because Seth Krishan Dass was Minister of H.U.D.A. Department. By misusing his official position, he got the land lying vacant opposite to his land acquired for Sector 37 as Industrial Sector so that the price of his land can appreciate and he can get profit. On the inquiry of allegation No. 15, it was found that in the municipal area of Rohtak between June, 1996 to June, 1999, development work was done on the asking/recommendation of Seth Krishan Dass and his son Manmohan and on their directions estimates were prepared by the J.E./M.E. of Municipal Committee and on their asking the same estimates were sent to Shri R.K. Garg, Executive Engineer, H.U.D.A., for execution of the work because Seth Krishan Dass was Minister of H.U.D.A. Department. In this way, the Executive Engineer, H.U.D.A., got the work of Rs. 12 crores done in the municipal area of Rohtak despite the fact that the officers of the Municipal Committee were competent enough to execute the work. Whether they wanted to do the work or not, the officers of the Municipal Committee were not asked before sending all the work for execution to the Executive Engineer, H.U.D.A. When information was asked from the Chief Administrator, H.U.D.A., Panchkula, on different points, then he gave his comments to the effect that the State Government gave the job of repairing/reconstruction of the damaged roads on PanipatBhiwaniRohtakSirsa towns to H.U.D.A. instead of the respective municipal committees and it was also decided that the funds will come from Flood Relief Fund and State Agricultural Marketing Board and the list of the roads to be repaired will be prepared by the respective Deputy Commissioners and the estimates will be sanctioned by the competent authority. In addition to this, Administrator, H.U.D.A., Faridabad, was given supervisory job of repair of roads of Rohtak. During inquiry, it was revealed that a total sum of Rs. 13,35,00,000/ were spent for the repair of roads of above said five towns. Out of this, Rs. 11,34,84,000/ were spent in the municipal limits of Rohtak town only. For the repair of roads of rest of four municipal towns, only Rs. 2 crores 5 lacs were spent despite the fact that all the four towns were adversely affected in 1995 floods. But because Siri Krishan Dass was Minister of H.U.D.A. Department and Rohtak town falls in his assembly constituency, therefore, he by misusing his official position committed discrimination so that he can have political gains. Mr. R.K. Garg, Executive Engineer, Rohtak stated in his statement that the sanction from the Deputy Commissioner, Rohtak, was taken for all the work executed by him but he was unable to present the list of the sanctioned works. In this connection, the inquiry officer tried to contact Shri Anil Kumar, I.A.S., the then Deputy Commissioner, Rohtak, to take his statement but Shri Anil Kumar, I.A.S. was also unable to give some satisfactory answer nor he could give any list of the sanctioned roads. During inquiry, it was also revealed that ignoring the Municipal Councillors of the Municipal Committee, in connivance with Shri Anil Kumar, I.A.S., the then Deputy Commissioner, Rohtak, Siri Krishan Dass, the then Minister and his son Man Mohan Singh got the construction work of roads done as per their wishes by getting the estimates prepared by the J.E./M.E. and sending the same for the execution to the Executive Engineer, H.U.D.A., Shri R.K. Garg. This includes a number of streets of the town also. Though Shri Anil Kumar, I.A.S., the then Deputy Commissioner, Rohtak, as per the decision of the State Government was supposed to first send the list of damaged roads of the town which were to be repaired by the Department of H.U.D.A., but he did not do so. In this way, he in connivance with Seth Krishan Dass and his son gave sanction for the roads and even streets as per their wishes and misusing his position. From the inquiry, it was also revealed that the estimates prepared by the Municipal Committee were enhanced by the Executive Engineer, H.U.D.A. in connivance with Seth Krishan Dass and his son Man Mohan and Shri Anil Kumar, I.A.S. the then Deputy Commissioner, Rohtak. 87 estimates which were ranging from Rs. 42,000/ to Rs. 2.5 lac were enhanced to Rs. 2 lacs to Rs. 9.50 lacs illegally.

In addition to this, the roads which were repaired/reconstructed by H.U.D.A., after taking it over from the Municipal Committee, are in bad shape. The material, i.e. cement etc. has been used in less quantity. If samples are taken and the assessment is got done, then the real loss in this episode can be established properly. In the above mentioned facts, Seth Krishan Dass, ExMinister, Haryana, his son Man Mohan, Shri Anil Kumar, I.A.S., Deputy Commissioner, Rohtak and R.K. Garg, Executive Engineer, H.U.D.A., Rohtak, and other officials/officers in connivance with each other by misusing their position got illegal benefits to the contractors and themselves and caused loss to the State and prepared a false record regarding the roads and on the conclusion of the inquiry, were found as accused and a suggestion was sent to the State Government to register a case against all of them under Sections 420/406/467/468/471/120B, Indian Penal Code and Section 13(1) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Now the State Government vide letter No. 21/3/992 CH(1) dated 31.12.1999 has ordered that a case be registered under the above mentioned sections against Seth Krishan Dass, ExMinister, Haryana, his son Man Mohan, Shri Anil Kumar, I.A.S., the then Deputy Commissioner, Rohtak, and R.K. Garg, Executive Engineer, H.U.D.A., Rohtak. Director General, State Vigilance Bureau, Haryana, Chandigarh, vide his order No. 12412 (secret) dated 21.12.1999 has written that the case be registered and the investigation be handed over to Shri Banwari Lal, DSP, and the copy of the FIR by way of special report is being sent to the Illaqa Magistrate and the higher officers.

Sd/ Hari Chand,

Inspector"

Fearing their arrest, all the four petitioners made applications under Section 438 Cr.P.C. before the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Rohtak, who for the reasons mentioned in the order dated 17.1.2000 dismissed the said applications. The reasons of dismissal of the applications precisely are contained in paras 8 to 14 of the order, which can be reproduced as under :

"8. Taking the benefit of his usual and painstaking ability, and attracting the attention of the Court towards Annexures DA to DJ, learned counsel for the petitioners, has contended with some amount of vehemence that as the decision to spend the amount for repairs of the damaged roads was taken and funds were sanctioned by the previous Government, therefore, the petitioners cannot be blamed for misutilising the funds. The arguments, at the first instance appeared very attractive, but when the same were scrutinized with relation to the policy file, then I cannot help observing that the arguments are not only devoid of merits, strictosensu, deserve to be ignored, but misplaced as well. Possibly, it cannot be denied that the decision to spend the sanctioned amount was taken by the previous Government, but the same would not come to the rescue of the petitioners, because according to the prosecution that before the execution of the actual work, the previous Government changed and the petitioner Seth Siri Krishan Dass, became the Minister and Chairman of HUDA. Subsequently, he illegally exercised his influence over petitioners Anil Kumar and R.K. Garg, prepared false and enhanced estimates of the works. The inferior and substandard quality of material was used in the repair works. According to the prosecution that the Government has sanctioned about Rs. 13,35,00,000/ for repairs of damaged roads in five districts namely Rohtak, Bhiwani, Panipat, Hisar and Sirsa, but all the petitioners misutilized and amount of Rs. 11,39,84,000/ in Rohtak alone and while an amount of Rs. 2,50,00,000/ only was spent in other four districts.

The argument of learned counsel that as the petitioners Anil Kumar and R.K. Garg, are not in any way connected with the misutilization of the funds, therefore, they deserve to be released on anticipatory bail, is again has no force, because there are direct allegations against them that petitioner Anil Kumar was officially required to prepare the list of extent of damaged road, before the execution of actual work. On the other hand, instead of preparing such list, he with the connivance of other accused, allowed misutilization of the public money and the works were illegally executed through petitioner R.K. Garg, XEN, HUDA, in Municipal Area, Rohtak, even without following the proper procedure and without consulting the Municipal Commissioners, as required under the law. Petitioner Anil Kumar was stated to had sent wrong compliance reports to the Government, in this regard. It was also alleged that the petitioners prepared the false/enhanced estimate for repairing the roads, in which inferior and substandard material was used. Thus, it would be seen that there are direct allegations against these petitioners of misutilization of public funds and the contrary arguments of learned counsel deserve to be and are hereby repelled, in the obtaining circumstances of the case.

The cosmetic argument of learned counsel that as the petitioner Seth Siri Krishan Dass was a Minister, petitioner Man Mohan is his son, petitioner Anil Kumar was Deputy Commissioner of Rohtak and petitioner R.K. Garg is XEN, HUDA, all are influential persons, so therefore, taking into consideration their official status, they deserve to be released on anticipatory bail, is again devoid of merits, because as illogical as it may look, but strictly speaking the tendency and frequency of politicians, exercising illegal influence over bureaucrats and other officials and tendency and frequency of such officers to do illegal acts at the instance of their political bosses and misutilising the public funds for illegal means of corruption, have been tremendously increasing day by day, in our society and perhaps the appropriate time has now come to tell such persons that to what extent this corruption has damaged the basic structure of our country.

The other argument of learned counsel that since there is no sufficient evidence against the petitioners, therefore, they are entitled to anticipatory bail, is again without merit and deserve to be ignored for more than one reasons. First of all, as indicated earlier, the present case was registered against the accused on 31.12.1999, when the petitioners Seth Siri Krishan Dass and Man Mohan Singh filed their applications for anticipatory bail on 28.12.1999 before learned Sessions Judge, Rohtak. Meaning thereby, the petitioners filed their bail applications, even prior to the registration of the case. The matter does not end there. The learned Public Prosecutor has pointed out that besides other evidence, the police has recorded the statements of MC PWs Amar Nath, Inder Singh, Sunita, Dharambir Tuli, Smt. Harsh Malik etc. and statements of J.E./M.Es. PWs Jagdish, Kartar, Geeta Ram and Narender etc. directly involving all the petitioners in the commission of present crime and their complicity is prima facie borne out from their statements even at this stage. That being so, it cannot possibly be said that there is no evidence against the petitioners.

The learned Public Prosecutor has very rightly urged that the petitioners do not deserve the concession of anticipatory bail and as if the concession of anticipatory bail is allowed to them then the police would be deprived of breaking the nexus of other accused with the petitioners in the scam, manner of misappropriation of crores of public money and effective investigations in such a serious case of corruption.

Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances emanating from the record, I am also of the view that the petitioners are not entitled to extra ordinary concession of anticipatory bail, in such a serious case of corruption at this preliminary stage of investigation irrespective of their official status, because it is now well settled law that the anticipatory bail is not to be granted as a matter of course. The grant or refusal of such bail must depend on variety of circumstances, the cumulative effect of which must enter the judicial verdict. The power under this Section is to be exercised sparingly as in exceptional cases and there must be a special case made out for passing such an order. Equally, it is now well recognized that the order of anticipatory bail should not be allowed to circumvent the normal procedure of arrest and investigation. The Court has also to see that investigation is the province of the police and an order of anticipatory bail should not operate as an inroad into the investigational powers of the police.

Essentially, taking the risk of repetition and thus seen from any angle, as indicated earlier, as there are direct allegations against the petitioners that they have committed the offences punishable under Sections 406/409/420/467/468/471 IPC and Section 13(1) of Prevention of Corruption Act, therefore, to my mind, the petitioners are not entitled for anticipatory bail, in the obtaining circumstances of the case."

In this manner, the petitioners have approached this Court under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

I have heard Mr. R.S. Cheema, Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. K.D.S. Hooda, Advocate, on behalf of the petitioners, Mr. Amarjit Singh, Additional Advocate General, on behalf of Haryana State and with their assistance have gone through the records of this case.

Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure lays down that when any person has reason to believe that he may be arrested on an accusation of having committed a nonbailable offence, he may apply to the High Court or the Court of Session for a direction under this Section; and that Court may, if it thinks fit, direct that in the event of such arrest, he shall be released on bail. Powers have further been given to the High Court as well as to the Court of Session to impose such conditions including the one incorporated in subsection (2) of Section 438 Cr.P.C. The scope and object of Section 438 has been considered by the Supreme Court of India as well as by various Courts including this Court through different pronouncements and it will be desirable for me at the first instance to make a mention of some of the guidelines in order to adjudicate and appreciate the controversy in hand. The object of Section 438 is to enable the Court of Session and High Court to direct the release of a person on bail prior to his arrest. However, such power, which vests in the High Court of Session is a power of extraordinary nature and is supposed to be exercised in exceptional cases. Anyhow, the benefit of anticipatory bail should not be refused merely because the prosecution claims that the accused is wanted in police custody for the purpose of investigation. The genuineness of the alleged need in police custody has to be examined on merits depending upon the facts of each case and while exercising the powers under Section 438 Cr.P.C. it is the responsibility of the Court of Session or the High Court that a balance must be struck so as to uphold the dignity of the law and to see whether the interest of justice demands custodial interrogation or not. The High Court and the Court of Session are also supposed to see that the dignity of an individual may not be downgraded simply that his opponent wants. But if the custodial interrogation of an individual is necessary in public interest, then the custody of such individual must be given to the Investigating Officer so that the process of investigation should not be impeded or disturbed or blocked irrespective of the fact that a person enjoys a status in the society or that he had been enjoying the political power. This Court is of the opinion that following are the few guidelines which can help the Court to determine the issue for the purpose of Section 438 Cr.P.C. :

(i) Nature and gravity of the circumstances in which the offence is committed;

(ii) The position and status of the accused with reference to the victim and the witnesses;

(iii) Likelihood of the accused fleeing from justice;

(iv) Repetition of offence;

(v) Tampering with the prosecution evidence; and

(vi) the history of the cases as well as of the investigation and other relevant grounds which may apply to the facts and circumstances of a particular case.

In Harish Jain v. State and others, 1994(3) RCR 405, the Hon''ble Judge of the Delhi High Court had laid down a few guidelines such as nature and seriousness of proposed charges; context of events likely to lead to the making of the charges; a reasonable opportunity of applicant''s presence not being secured at trial and a reasonable apprehension that witnesses will be tampered with the larger interests of public or the State. His Lordship was also of the view that while exercising the power under Section 438 Cr.P.C., the Court should always see that public does not lose faith in the administration of justice on account of the persons involved in heinous crimes being set at large.

The Hon''ble Suprme Court in the famous case of Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia etc. v. The State of Punjab, AIR 1980 Supreme Court 1632, observed as follows :

"We would, therefore, prefer to leave the High Court and the Court of Session to exercise their jurisdiction under Section 438 by a wise and careful use of their discretion which, by their long training and experience, they are ideally suited to do. The ends of justice will be better served by trusting these Courts to act objectively and in consonance with principles governing the grant of bail which are recognised over the years, than by divesting them of their discretion which the legislature has conferred upon them, by laying down inflexible rules of general application. It is customary, almost chronic, to take a statute as one finds it on the ground that after all "the legislature in its wisdom" has thought it fit to use a particular expression. A convention may usefully grow whereby the High Court and the Court of Session may be trusted to exercise their discretionary powers in their wisdom, especially when the discretion is entrusted to their care by the legislature in its wisdom, if they are liable to be corrected."

In R.K. Ranga v. State of Haryana, 1997(2) Recent CR 611, this Court was of the view that remedy of anticipatory bail is an extraordinary remedy provided in law and has to be resorted to only in exceptional cases and if special grounds are made out. The other observations made by this Court I will discuss in the later part of the order when I will deal the case individually of each of the accused/applicant. To carry on this discussion, this Court was of the opinion in the said case that person seeking anticipatory bail has to satisfy by making out a special case that the charges levelled against him are mala fide and stem from ulterior motive. It was further observed that the Courts, before invoking the provisions of Section 438 Cr.P.C., should take note of the fact of the gravity of the allegations, the position and status of the accused with reference to the victim and the witnesses and whether there is a scope on the part of the accused to tamper with the prosecution evidence directly or indirectly.

The Hon''ble Supreme Court in State Rep. by the CBI v. Anil Sharma, JT 1997(7) SC 651, observed as under :

"We find force in the submission of the CBI that custodial interrogation is qualitatively more elicitation orientated than questioning a suspect who is well ensconced with a favourable order under Section 438 of the Code. In a case like this effective interrogation of suspected person is of tremendous advantage in disinterring many useful informations and also materials which would have been concealed. Success in such interrogation would elude if the suspected person knows that he is well protected and insulted by a prearrest bail order during the time he is interrogated. Very often interrogation in such a condition would reduce to a mere ritual. The argument that the custodial interrogation is fraught with the danger of the person being subjected to third degree methods need not be countenanced, for, such an argument can be advanced by all accused in all criminal cases. The Court has to presume that responsible Police Officers would conduct themselves in a responsible manner and that those entrusted with the task of disinterring offences would not conduct themselves as offenders.

High Court has approached the issue as though it was considering a prayer for granting regular bail after arrest. Learned Single Judge of the High Court reminded himself of the principle that "it is wellsettled that bail and not jail is a normal Rule".

The above observations are more germane while considering an application for postarrest bail. Consideration which should weigh with the Court while dealing with a request for anticipatory bail need not be the same as for an application to release on bail after arrest. At any rate learned Single Judge ought not to have sidestepped the apprehension expressed by the CBI (that respondent would influence the witnesses) as one which can be made against all accused persons in all cases. The apprehensions was quite reasonable when considering the high position which respondent held and in the nature of accusation relating to a period during which he held such office."

"Custodial interrogation in public interest" has not been defined either in the Code of Criminal Procedure or under the Indian Penal Code, but it is not difficult for us to give the correct interpretation to the term "custodial interrogation in public interest". Day in and day out we are witnessing with regret and sorrow that our political executive and bureaucracy are being involved in corruption cases. Allegations are with regard to nepotism and also with regard to the getting of materialistic gains. Various scams running into crores and multicrores have come to the notice of the investigating agencies and the governments from time to time. Hardly there is any quarter of the society which has not been affected with the scams etc. What type of impression we are giving to our public can be easily judged and opinion can be formulated in this regard. What example our leaders are setting for the masses is a sad tale in itself. The materialistic race is going on in every section of the society and this disease of corruption has eaten the very roots of our system. Everyone is concerned about corruption. But very few are giving proper attention how to eradicate this menace.

From the above, I have been able to deduce this point that if the custodial interrogation of an accused is necessary in public interest and that the gravity of the allegations is such that the custody of the accused should be handed over to the police for fair and impartial investigation, the provisions of Section 438 should not be invoked in favour of such an accused. Further this Court is of the opinion that if a ring of bail is extended around an accused, he may not be of much assistance to the Investigating Officer to arrive at a just conclusion during the course of investigation which is the predominant right of the investigating agency.

Reverting to the facts in hand, the learned counsel Mr. Cheema, appearing on behalf of the petitioners, tried to convince to this Court that due process of law was complied with when the industrial sector was carved out. Such sectors are carved out with the approval of National Capital Regulatory Board of which the petitioner Siri Krishan Dass was not the member. It was also contended that there is no iota of evidence so far with the Investigating Officer that the said petitioner ever interfered in the proceedings of acquisition. Until and unless there is a specific evidence with the Investigating Officer with regard to the role adopted by Siri Krishan Dass, no pointer should be raised against him. Also prima facie there is no evidence that the road work which was done was of substandard quality. No sample of the material has been taken so far so as to formulate an opinion that any bungling was done by Siri Krishan Dass, who was the Minister. The counsel submitted that Siri Krishan Dass and his son Man Mohan Singh are the victims of political wrath with the change of ministry in Haryana and Shri Om Parkash Chautala, the present Chief Minister of Haryana wanted to settle the scores because at one point of time Ch. Devi Lal contested the election of Parliament from Rohtak constituency and he was defeated with a small margin and since then a fire was brewing in the heart of Shri Chautala to take a revenge against Siri Krishan Dass and his son. Mr. Cheema also pleaded the case of Shri Anil Kumar and Shri R.K. Garg by stating that Shri Anil Kumar could not oblige the election agent of Shri Devi Lal when he prayed for the recounting of the votes and his request was declined by a speaking order by Shri Anil Kumar in the performance of his duties and for this reason Shri Chautala and his family members were trying to settle the scores. The learned counsel also pleaded the case of Shri Garg by stating that all the work of repair has been done according to rules and in these circumstances all the four petitioners deserve the concession of anticipatory bail, and the bail should not be declined to them simply that Siri Krishan Dass was the exminister and that Shri Anil Kumar is an I.A.S. Officer. Similarly bail should also be granted to Shri R.K. Garg. It was also the contention of Mr. Cheema that Shri Man Mohan Singh has been implicated in this case simply that he is the son of Siri Krishan Dass. The entire exercise has been done with a view that elections in Haryana were going to be announced. The political rivals of Siri Krishan Dass and Shri Man Mohan Singh wanted to subdue them by registering a criminal case against them. The action on the part of the State Government in the registration of the present case smacks of the mala fides.

On the contrary, the bail has been opposed by the learned Additional Advocate General on the ground that Siri Krishan Dass was the minister and the department of H.U.D.A. was under his supervision. This petitioner owned land running into 70 acres where he had created a farmhouse. The land measuring 130 acres at one point of time was acquired by the government but it was de requisitioned. When Siri Krishan Dass became the minister, he wanted to take the advantage of his position and again the land was acquitted the object of which was only to appreciate the prices of adjoining area. Since Siri Krishan Dass had a large chunk of 70 acres of land, he wanted to get the huge price of this area and this could only be possible if this area of 130 acres is acquired by the government. The counsel also submitteed that Rs. 13,35,000/ were earmarked for the repairs of the roads, out of which Rs. 11,39,84,000/ were diverted for the repairs of the roads of Rohtak District. There were four more towns like Hisar, Bhiwani, Panipat and Sirsa and for those towns only funds to the tune of Rs. 2,50,00,000/ were allocated irrespective of the fact that damage caused to the roads of these four districts was to the same extent that of the roads of Rohtak district and all this had been done with an ulterior motive and for extraneous consideration because Siri Krishan Dass wanted that the work of repairs be carried out by the H.U.D.A. of which he was the incharge and in this manner he would be directly or indirectly benefited. The intention of Siri Krishan Dass was very clear that he wanted to make his political importance in the district by inviting the attention of the public at large that he was responsible for getting Rs. 11,39,84,000/ for the purpose of repair of the roads. All this exercise has been done by Siri Krishan Dass in connivance with Shri Anil Kumar, I.A.S., who was the then Deputy Commissioner, Rohtak and also with the conivance of Shri R.K. Garg, who was the Executive Engineer. The learned counsel further submitted that all recognised norms have been sent to winds when the elected Municipal Councillors of the town were not consulted. The estimates were inflated causing considerable loss to the State exchequer and in such a situation a case for custodial interrogation has been made out in public interest, especially when the three petitioners have misused their powers. Even now Shri Anil Kumar and Shri R.K. Garg hold influence in the department and they would definitely tamper with the prosecution evidence. At least they would try to influence the witnesses who may be interrogated during the course of investigation. The counsel also submitted that a pecuniary advantage has been obtained by all the four petitioners and, therefore, they do not deserve the concession of bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

I have considered the rival contentions of the parties and have independently given my due thought to the matter keeping in view the guidelines referred to above and the views formulated by the Hon''ble Judges of the Supreme Court and various High Courts and am of the considered opinion that case of custodial interrogation visavis Siri Krishan Dass, Shri Anil Kumar and Shri R.K. Garg is made out as the allegations against them are very serious and required to be probed to the logical ends. It is the admitted case of the accused party that Siri Krishan Dass was the minister and the department of H.U.D.A. was under his control. It is also the admitted case of the accused that an area running into 70 acres is situated close by to the acquired area of 130 acres. We can easily formulate an opinion that when an area has been acquired by H.U.D.A. for industrial purposes, the prices of the adjoining area will shoot like anything. Everybody has a style of working. Nobody will try to gain the benefit apparently. Some decisions are taken in such a secrecy and with such a motive that apparently the action on the part of the authorities may look innocent but on deeper scrutiny such an action is calculated to gain advantage. The things speaks for themselves that out of Rs. 13,35,00,000/ a sum of Rs. 11,39,84,000/ was diverted for Rohtak, which is the constituency of Siri Krishan Dass. It is also a fact that construction of the roads etc. has been done by H.U.D.A. of which he was the minister. A person who wielded considerable influence when he was the minister would always try to exercise his influence upon others. Though an effort has been made in order to convince to this Corut that Shri Anil Kumar and Shri R.K. Garg are the victims of malice at the instance of Shri O.P. Chautala, I am not convinced with the argument of Mr. Cheema. The allegations are very clear that these officers broke the norms. The plans were not got sanctioned according to rules. It is very easy to make allegations on the part of a public servant against political bosses, but before such allegations may be accepted, strong evidence is also required to give a verdict in favour of such a person.

K.B. Sharma v. State of U.T. Chandigarh, 1998(3) RCR(Criminal) 779 it was held by this Court that the consensus of opinion of the law Courts is that Courts learned in favour of custodial interrogation in cases where huge public funds were involved. In Er. K.K. Jerath v. Union Territory, Chandigarh, 1998(2) RCR(Criminal) 419 it was held that if public interest requires detention of citizen in custody for purposes of investigation, the anticipatory bail should be declined. The observations can be quoted as follows :

"......We may only state in considering a petition for grant of bail necessarily if public interest requires detention of citizen in custody for purposes of investigation could be considered and rejected as otherwise there could be hurdles in the investigation even resulting in tampering of evidence........"

With regard to the case of Shri Man Mohan Singh, admittedly, this man was not in authority. Simply he is the son of his coaccused, who at one time was the minister incharge, is no ground to reject his anticipatory bail. Qua him case of custodial interrogation in public interest is not made out.

The upshoot of the above discussion is that anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is granted to Shri Man Mohan Singh, petitioner No. 2 of Criminal Misc. No. 2276M/2000 and directions are given to the Investigating Officer that in the event of the arrest of this person he shall be enlarged on bail to this satisfaction. This petitioner shall join the investigation as and when called upon by the Investigating Officer. He shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence directly or indirectly and he would not leave the country without the prior permission of the Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned and shall surrender his passport, if any, with the Investigating Officer. He shall also produce all documentary evidence if the same is in his power and possession before the Investigating Officer. Any violation of the directions of this Court by the said petitioners would give a right to the State to make a reference to this Court for the cancellation of bail of Shri Man Mohan Singh. So far as the prayer of Siri Krishan Dass, Shri Anil Kumar and Shri R.K. Garg is concerned, the same is hereby declined.

Petitions dismissed.