JUDGMENT Ravindra Singh, J.
1. Heard Sri V.M. Zaidi, learned Counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P. and Sri Zafar Abbas, learned Counsel for the complainant.
2. This is second bail application. Crl.Misc. I Bail Application No. 9592 of 2005 has been rejected by this Court on 15,9.2005, considering the case on its merit.
3. From the perusal of the record, it appears that in the present case there is embezzlement of a huge amount of Rs. 6, 12,842/- of Gram Panchayat. In this case, an enquiry was conducted under the authority of District Magistrate, Kioradabad on an application moved by the villagers in which the irregularities had been done by the applicant and the fund of the Gram Sabha was misappropriated, after intensive and proper enquiry it was found that the Pradhan of the village misappropriated the aforesaid amount. Thereafter Block Development Officer, Asmauli was instructed by Chief Development Officer to lodge the F.I.R. against the applicant and other co-accused persons. The applicant was Gran Pradhan. The applicant challenged the F.I.R. of this case in Crl.Misc.Writ Petition No. 9234 of 2005 , the same was dismissed by this Court oh 25.1.2005 but In another Writ Petition No. 53111 of 2004 filed by the applicant , this Hon'ble Court had directed the District Magistrate to make a fresh enquiry against the applicant. On that direction, the Executive Engineer, Nalkoop Mandal was appointed Enquiry Officer and as per enquiry it was found that the applicant and other co-accused had embezzled the total amount of Rs. 6,12,642/-. The applicant is hard core criminal, about 12 criminal cases have been registered against him.
4. It is contended by the learned Counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated due to village partybandi and he is in jail since 6.3.2005.
5. It appears that in this application, only new ground is period of detention of the applicant that he had remained in jail for more than one year but considering the fact that the applicant has committed an offence which is against the system effecting public at large, the offence committed by the applicant is not an offence committed against the individual. For the development of the villages and to provide the better facilities to the public at large, the money is released by the government trusting upon the village Pradhan who happens to be elected by the villagers and a trust is made by the government upon him but the embezzlement of such amount by the village Pradhan ejecting the system by which a government is launching a scheme to uplift the standard of living of villagers who are facing many difficulties and passing their miserable lives because poverty is there, according to me it is a grave offence. In such cases no lenient view should be taken on the ground of detention of such accused for a such period of about one year and there is no other new good ground, therefore the prayer for bail is refused.
6. However, considering the period of the detention of the applicant, it is directed that the learned Sessions Judge concerned shall ensure that the trial of the applicant be expedited in accordance with the provisions of law in case certified copy of this order is filed on behalf of the applicant.
7. Accordingly, this application is rejected.