JUDGMENT Amreshwar Pratap Sahi, J. Heard Sri Satish Trivedi, learned Senior Counsel for the applicant and Sri N.I. Jafri for the CBI. 2. A counter affidavit has been filed by the learned Counsel for the CBI. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant has prayed parity of bail with Dr. Rameshwar Singh in Bail Application No. 7401 of 2015 vide order dated 20.3.2015. The same is extracted hereinunder: - "A counter affidavit has been filed by Sri Anurag Khanna for the CBI today. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is prepared to deposit the proportionate amount of the alleged loss to the exchequer. It is pointed out by Sri Anrag Khanna, learned counsel for the CBI that approximately an amount of of Rs. 8.3 lacs is the liability against three public servants. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that similar cases have been dealt with by the Apex Court, particularly in the case of Dr. P.P. Verma Vs. CBI and a copy of the order of the Apex Court is Annexure 6 to this application alongwith the other bail orders of other individuals who were also Medical Officers that were considered by this Court and release orders were passed subject to conditions. The order of the Apex Court is quoted herein under: - "UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The National Rural Health Mission Scheme (NRHM) was launched with a view to providing accessible, adequate, affordable, accountable and reliable health care to all persons particularly the vulnerable people residing in remote areas. On 15.12.2011 in Public Interest Litigation Petitions filed before the Allahabad High Court, the Allahabad High Court gave a direction to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to conduct an inquiry in the execution and implementation of NRHM Scheme. Allahabad High Court further directed that if prima facie, commission of cognizable offence is found, then a case be registered. In pursuance of these directions, inquiry was conducted and on 23.03.2012, the CBI registered an FIR against the petitioner, the then Chairman of the 2 Purchase Committee and also the Chief Medical Officer and others under Sections 420/467/468/471/477A read with Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 3(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. On 14.02.2013, the CBI filed charge-sheet against 12 persons which included the petitioner under Sections 120B an 420 of the IPC and Section 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. It is inter alia the case of the prosecution that the Purchase Committee which was headed by the petitioner purchased Iron Folic Acid tablets at Rs.26 paise per tablet, which was available in the open market at Rs.6 paise per tablet. This resulted in the loss of Rs.11,07,692/- to the Government. The petitioner surrendered before the trial court on 23.10.2013 and ever since he is in judicial custody. The petitioner filed bail application before the Allahabad High Court. The Allahabad High Court by the impugned order rejected the petitioner's bail application and hence, the petitioner has filed the present special leave petition. We have heard Mr. Huzefa Ahmadi, learned senior counsel for the petitioner, at some length and learned senior counsel for the CBI. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner points out that several persons who are similarly placed have been released on bail by the High Court. A chart showing the details in that regard is submitted in the Court today. After perusing the same, we find the statement to be correct. Inasmuch as the similarly situated persons have been released on bail, we think that the petitioner shall also be released on bail. It is also necessary to note that the charge sheet is already filed in the case and the petitioner is in jail for about 11 months. In the circumstances, the petitioner Dr. Prem Prakash Verma is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned on the following conditions : 1.The petitioner shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; 2. The petitioner shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; 3. The petitioner shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court; 4. The petitioner shall deposit an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lac only). Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the amount of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lac only) will be deposited within a period of four weeks from today. On such deposit being made, the 3 trial court shall invest the said amount in any nationalized bank on usual terms. The petitioner shall deposit an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lac only). Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the amount of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lac only) will be deposited within a period of four weeks from today. On such deposit being made, the 3 trial court shall invest the said amount in any nationalized bank on usual terms. In case of breach of any of the conditions enumerated above, the order granting bail shall automatically stand cancelled. The special leave petition is disposed of. (Gulshan Kumar Arora) (Indu Pokhriyal) Court Master Court Master" Learned counsel for the applicant has pressed into service those very grounds and conditions under which he prays for bail. This Court has considered similar bail matters and keeping in view the reasons given therein, the applicant is also entitled to bail. In the instant case the loss caused on account of the accused involved herein indicates the proportionate liability of approximately Rs. 3 Lacs on the applicant. However, since the applicant is entitled to bail for the same reasons, as indicated in the order quoted hereinabove, the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. Let the applicant Dr. Rameshwar Singh, involved in Special Case No.15 of 2014, and F.I.R. No. R.C. DST/2012/A0001/CBI/STF/DLI under Section 120-B read with Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 477A IPC and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 & substantive offences under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 477A IPC, and Section 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act Police Station C.B.I. S.T.F. New Delhi, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned on the following conditions : - 1. The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; 2. The applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; 3. The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court. 4. The applicant shall deposit his passport with the trial court. In addition to the above, the applicant shall deposit Rs. 3 Lacs, which is the amount of loss caused to the State Exchequer because of the acts of the applicant, by way of a draft in the name of the trial court within four weeks from the date of his release. In addition to the above, the applicant shall deposit Rs. 3 Lacs, which is the amount of loss caused to the State Exchequer because of the acts of the applicant, by way of a draft in the name of the trial court within four weeks from the date of his release. The amount shall be invested in fixed deposit scheme in a nationalized bank and shall be renewed from time to time till the termination of the trial. The deposit so made, shall be subject to the final decision of the trial court. In case of default of compliance with any of the conditions enumerated above, the order granting bail shall stand cancelled automatically. This bail application stands allowed on the aforesaid terms." The charge against the applicant is as follows: "Sh. S.K. Kashyap, Pharmacist, Gorakhpur prepared the minutes of all the meetings in the purchase committee minutes register and the minutes have been signed by all the above mentioned members except Dr. Kusum Dubey although no such purchase committee meeting conducted on the dates. The minutes did not mention about discussion of the quotation formalities but all the members of the purchase committee were pressurized to sign the comparative chart and also on the indents. Purchase committee members were compelled by Dr.R.N. Singh to follow his directions. They signed on the minutes of the meeting under the pressure of Dr. R.N. Singh, the then CMO (FW), Gorakhpur. Investigation revealed that Dr. R.N. Singh, the then CMO (FW), Gorakhpur, Dr. Rameshwar Singh, Dy. CMO and Sh. S.K. Kashyap, Pharmacist used forged quotations in the quotation process to give undue favour to M/s Seva Enterprises which was selected as L-1, as per the comparative chart. Investigation revealed that in all the occasion, quotations were directly received by Dr. R.N. Singh, the then CMO (FW), Gorakhpur. The purchase committee members and MOICs have stated that they signed on the comparative chart on being pressurized by Dr. R.N. Singh who stated to sign on the comparative chart stating that M/s Seva Enterprises has already been selected for supplying of these items and they obeyed the directions of the then CMO (FW). The total purchase was split into several separate orders/indents to bring individual separate purchases amounting to less than Rs. 1 lakh deliberately for fulfilling the vested interest. The total purchase was split into several separate orders/indents to bring individual separate purchases amounting to less than Rs. 1 lakh deliberately for fulfilling the vested interest. During investigation it is revealed that all the purchase indents were issued under the joint signature of Dr. J.P. Singh, ACMO (Store) and Dr. R.N. Singh. The surgical items/medical equipment so received were entered in the stock books and records by Sh. S.K. Kashyap, Pharmacist in his hand writing. He in criminal conspiracy with Dr. R.N. Singh recorded receipt of the materials on the bills and made false entries that the materials were received in the store. All the bills of M/s Seva Enterprises, Lucknow have been passed for payments by Dr. Rameshwar Singh including the items shown supplied to PHC Jungle Kodiya wherein some medical Kits and surgical items worth Rs. 2.98/- lakhs have been found short supplied during investigation which clearly shows involvement of criminal conspiracy among the above three officials of the Gorakhpur CMO office. The above mentioned fact shows that the quotation submitted in the name of two participating firms are forged. One of the two firms who denied having participated in the quotation process belongs to Sh. Sanjay Aggarwal, namely M/s Charishma Healthcare and his statement is not reliable as he is accused in many CBI cases. However, version of Ms Rekha Sachdeva, Prop of Lark Agencies is relevant that the forged quotation of her firm was used for giving undue favour to the L-1 firm M/s Seva Enterprises. It is clear from the above mentioned facts that the forged documents were used by the accused persons for cheating purpose on the basis of which the accused CMO (FW) in criminal conspiracy with others had abused his official position and splitted the purchase indents below Rs. 1 lakh and purchased the items/goods through quotation from the accused firm without calling for open tenders. During investigation purchase bills of M/s Seva Enterprises, Lucknow have also been collected wherein it is found that the firm has procured items from M/s Hindustan Trading Company, Lucknow (Proprietorship firm of Ms. Zeba Sultan W/o Sh. Raees Alam Siddiqui) and a few other firms. It is disclosed during investigation that the items sold to CMO (FW) Gorakhpur were purchased on very cheaper rates. Hence, there is huge difference in the rates on which M/s Seva Enterprises sold items to CMO Office. Zeba Sultan W/o Sh. Raees Alam Siddiqui) and a few other firms. It is disclosed during investigation that the items sold to CMO (FW) Gorakhpur were purchased on very cheaper rates. Hence, there is huge difference in the rates on which M/s Seva Enterprises sold items to CMO Office. During investigation rates of the sale and purchase price of M/s Seva Enterprises of some of the items/surgical items have been compared and it is found that a loss of Rs. 8.13 lakhs approximately has been caused to the Government during the supply of M/s Seva Enterprises out of the total supply of Rs. 27.15/- lakhs (approximately). For purchase of these items again no tender was called and the purchase was apparently done on basis of forged quotation which is already discussed above. The bills for these items were cleared and drafts/cheques in favour of M/s Seva Enterprises made and handed over to the party. Investigation has also revealed that M/s Seva Enterprises, Lucknow did not supply the entire quantity as per the indent orders and the bills submitted by it. Sh. S.K. Kashyap, Pharmacist made false entries in the documents of the districts and payments were made to the party in spite of non-receipt of complete supply of items. From the facts mentioned above it is clear that Dr. R.N. Singh, Dr. Rameshwar Singh and Sh. S.K. Kashyap abused their official position as public servants and entered into criminal conspiracy with Sh. Raees Alam Siddiqui, Prop. M/s Seva Enterprises, Lucknow in furtherance of which forged quotations were used as genuine for cheating the government exchequer by making/showing supplies in the district on exorbitant rates. The facts mentioned above shows that M/s Seva Enterprises, Lucknow had purchased surgical items/miscellaneous goods from open market on cheaper rates and subsequently sold the same to CMO (FW), Gorakhpur for Rs. 27.15 lacs. Had the CMO purchased the said surgical items/general goods from any manufacturer or open market or by calling tenders the rate would have been cheaper. Thus the accused persons caused a loss of Rs. 8.13 lacs approximately to the government exchequer and corresponding undue gain to the fraudulent supplier." 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is prepared to deposit the proportionate amount of the alleged loss to the exchequer. 5. Thus the accused persons caused a loss of Rs. 8.13 lacs approximately to the government exchequer and corresponding undue gain to the fraudulent supplier." 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is prepared to deposit the proportionate amount of the alleged loss to the exchequer. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has pressed into service those very grounds and conditions under which he prays for bail. 6. This Court has considered similar bail matters and keeping in view the undertaking given by the learned counsel on behalf of the applicant that the applicant will deposit the proportionate amount of the alleged loss to the State Exchequer, the applicant is also entitled to bail. 7. In the instant case the loss caused on account of the accused involved herein indicates the proportionate liability of approximately Rs. 3 Lacs on the applicant. However, since the applicant is entitled to bail for the same reasons, as indicated in the order quoted hereinabove, the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. 8. Let the applicant Dr. R.N. Singh, involved in Special Case No.15 of 2014, F.I.R. No. R.C./DST/2012/A/0001/CBI/STF/DLI dated 23.2.2013, under Section 120-B read with Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471 & 477A IPC and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 & substantive offences under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471 & 477A IPC, and Section 506 (first part) of the I.P.C. and Section 13(2) r/w Section 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Police Station C.B.I./S.T.F./New Delhi, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned on the following conditions : - 1. The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; 2. The applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; 3. The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court. 4. The applicant shall deposit his passport with the trial court. 9. In addition to the above, the applicant shall deposit Rs. 3 Lacs, which is the amount of loss caused to the State Exchequer because of the acts of the applicant, by way of a draft in the name of the trial court within four weeks from the date of his release. 9. In addition to the above, the applicant shall deposit Rs. 3 Lacs, which is the amount of loss caused to the State Exchequer because of the acts of the applicant, by way of a draft in the name of the trial court within four weeks from the date of his release. The amount shall be invested in fixed deposit scheme in a nationalized bank and shall be renewed from time to time till the termination of the trial. The deposit so made, shall be subject to the final decision of the trial court. 10. In case of default of compliance with any of the conditions enumerated above, the order granting bail shall stand cancelled automatically. This bail application stands allowed on the aforesaid terms.