Atul Sreedharan, J.:— Since all the bail applications arise out from the same crime number, they are being disposed of by a common order.
2. At the very outset, learned counsel for the applicants has placed before me the order dt.16.06.2016 passed in M.Cr.C No. 9755/2016 by which the applicant Raghunath Choudhary was granted anticipatory bail in the case arising from the same crime number in which the applicants are also accused persons. Raghunath Choudhary was the Chief Executive Officer of the Special Area Development Authority. The applicants herein are the contractors who had won contracts being the lowest bidders for the construction of dwelling places within Special Area Development Authority which is now known as Municipal Corporation of Nepa Nagar. The allegation against them are similar to that of the applicant in M.Cr.C No. 9755/2016 to the extent that the applicants herein had conspired with the other co-accused persons in getting the contracts for the construction of the said houses and not completed the work that was assigned to them and had taken monetory advances for the same. Ground-IV of the said order on account of which this Court had granted anticipatory bail to the applicant in M.Cr.C No. 9755/2016, was the prima-facie finding of this Court that the inspection report dt. 18.11.2011 by the experts on the basis of which the complaint leading to the registration of FIR was based, does not speak of any criminality on the part of the engineers who assessed the work of the contractors. In fact, the said report has not even obliquely stated that the engineers associated with overseeing the work of the contractors, deliberately ensured excess payment to the contractors in order to benefit them and the fact that certain excess payments of running bills, without adjusting the procurement advance made to the contractors, was done on account of which certain dues became recoverable from the contractors. The said report does not attribute any malafide to the engineers who are co-accused persons herein.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the engineers who were overseeing the work of the contractors, were applicants herein, have not been indicted for any criminal action. Under the circumstances, the applicants herein also cannot be deemed to have committed any criminal act merely because certain amounts are recoverable against them.
4. Learned G.A for the State has submitted that in all there is about Rs. 7,32,284/- which is recoverable from the contractors.
5. Looking into the facts and circumstances of the case and the order passed in M.Cr.C No. 9755/2016 and the fact that the FIR has been registered after a delay of almost 24 years after the alleged commission of the offence, I am inclined to allow the instant application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C in favour of the applicants namely Kishore Tomar in M.Cr.C No. 9445/2016, Deepak Choukse in M.Cr.C No. 9447 & Atul Singh Chouhan in M.Cr.C No. 9448/2016 and direct the Police or the Arresting Officer to release the applicants herein on bail upon their arrest on their furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rs. Fifty Thousand Only) each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer.
6. The applicants shall further abide by all the conditions enumerated u/s 438(2) of the Cr.P.C
7. The applicants are directed to co-operate with the investigation as and when call upon to do so. In the event, the applicants fail to cooperate with the investigating process, the State is at liberty to move an appropriate application for the cancellation of the relief granted herein.
8. C.C as per rules.