Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 926 (MP)

TINOO (MRS. ) JOSHI v. STATE OF M. P.

2015-09-02

SHANTANU KEMKAR

body2015
JUDGMENT : 1. Heard with the aid of case diary. 2. This is an application filed under section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code for grant of bail in connection with Crime No. 102/10 registered at Special Police Establishment, Lokayukt Organization Bhopal for the commission of alleged offence under sections 13(1)(e), 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and under sections 467, 468, 109 and 120-B of Indian Penal Code. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the charge-sheet has been filed on 4-3-2015 and that the applicant has by now remained in custody for a period of about 4 months and there is no likelihood of the trial to be completed within a short period. He also submits that looking to the unblemished prior service record of the applicant, who is a woman, the application be allowed. 4. On the other hand, Shri Pankaj Dubey, learned counsel for the respondent/Lokayukt has opposed the application. He submits that the applicant who was a Senior IAS officer, was earlier granted temporary bail by this Court vide order dated 30-1-2015 for getting her surgery done on medical ground as it was stated that she requires urgent surgery. However, she misused the liberty of temporary bail of 3 months granted to her as she neither got the surgery done nor surrendered after lapse of the period of temporary bail, but had surrendered after long lapse of the period of bail when the warrant of arrest was issued against her. Thereafter on 12-5-2015 the application for extension of period of bail filed by her was rejected by this Court with liberty to her to apply for fresh bail or temporary bail for getting the surgery done after surrender on being medically examined and recommended by the expert Government Doctors of the Government Hospital at Bhopal. But till date the applicant did not got herself examined by Govt. Doctors. Thus he submits that her earlier application on the ground of her requiring urgent surgery as she was suffering from severe pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) and Endometritis may not be true. He also argued that applicant's husband Arvind Kumar Joshi an IAS Officer co-accused in this case is absconding since long and that there is every likelihood of he being fled away from the country. He further submits that possibility of this applicant to be fled away after getting the bail cannot be ruled out. 5. He also argued that applicant's husband Arvind Kumar Joshi an IAS Officer co-accused in this case is absconding since long and that there is every likelihood of he being fled away from the country. He further submits that possibility of this applicant to be fled away after getting the bail cannot be ruled out. 5. Learned counsel for the respondent also pointed out that on 5-8-2015 an application was submitted by the applicant for interim/temporary bail on the ground of marriage of her daughter, which was rejected by this Court as no authentic document was filed by the applicant and when the Dy. Superintendent of Lokayukt Organization visited the place of the applicant's father-in-law Shri Hariballabh Joshi shown to be the her permanent residence to verify the fact about marriage of applicant's daughter the said Hari Vallabh Joshi denied to provide any information to the Dy. Superintendent of Lokayukt. Thus he submits that as the applicant has not provided her correct permanent residential address, her application deserves to be rejected on this ground also. He also argued that the allegation against the applicant and her husband Arvind Joshi is that both of them earned huge money by adopting corrupt practices. The money and property acquired by them is more than 3151% from their known sources of income. Thus looking to the offences registered against the applicant and the fact that her husband is absconding and is to be interrogated, the application be rejected. 6. Undoubtedly the applicant and her husband both are Senior IAS Officers, instead of serving the public both of them indulged in corrupt practices and earned huge money highly disproportionate to their known sources of income. Now a days corruption has become menace to the society. In the circumstances, taking into account the seriousness of the allegations levelled against the applicant coupled with the fact that on earlier occasion the applicant misused the liberty granted to her and as also the fact that her husband is absconding, I am of the considered view that no case is made out to allow the application. 7. As a result, the application deserves to be and is hereby rejected.