The Rajasthan High Court has once again refused to grant bail to an accused in the high-profile REET paper leak scandal, which is being investigated by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) under money laundering charges. The court found no grounds for a change in the circumstances that led to the earlier rejection of bail.
Court's Order and Background of the Case
On Wednesday, a bench presided over by Justice Praveer Bhatnagar dismissed the second bail application filed by the accused, Rajuram. The court held that the petitioner had failed to make out any change in circumstances that would warrant the grant of bail. This decision comes after the same high court had rejected Rajuram's first bail plea on February 10.
The accused had approached the high court again following a directive from the Supreme Court. While dismissing his special leave petition, the Supreme Court had instructed the trial court to expedite the proceedings and make an effort to conclude the prosecution evidence within a span of six months. The apex court had also granted liberty to the petitioner to apply for bail afresh during this period.
Arguments Presented by Both Sides
During the hearing, the petitioner's counsel, Pankaj Gupta, argued that despite the Supreme Court's clear directions, the trial had not progressed. He submitted that charges had not been framed, and the trial in both the scheduled offence and the PMLA (Prevention of Money Laundering Act) case had not commenced.
Strongly opposing the bail plea, the counsel for the Enforcement Directorate, Akshay Bhardwaj, brought the court's attention to the petitioner's chequered criminal history. He contended that the high court had already examined the merits of the case in detail while rejecting the first bail application. Bhardwaj argued that the delays in the trial were caused by multiple applications filed by the accused and other co-accused, and therefore, these delays could not be attributed to the prosecution.
Court's Final Ruling and Implications
The bench, after hearing both sides, reiterated its earlier findings based on the prima facie involvement and criminal conduct of the accused. Convinced by the ED's arguments and finding no new compelling reason, the court dismissed the second bail application.
This ruling underscores the judiciary's firm stance on cases involving alleged corruption and money laundering in public examination scandals. It signals that bail may remain elusive for accused individuals, especially when the prosecution establishes a strong prima facie case and highlights a history of criminal conduct. The order also places an onus on the trial court to adhere to the Supreme Court's timeline for concluding the evidence.
