Cuttack, Aug. 26: Orissa High Court has ruled that delay in the progress of trial "in the factual scenario" does not create a ground for grant of bail.

The court said a trial court could not be blamed for the delay, and it could not be a ground for grant of bail if the delay was caused deliberately by the accused.

The court held this on Thursday, while rejecting for the fourth time the bail petition of Deepak Gupta, a key accused in the Rs 1,500-crore Uliburu mining scam in Odisha. The court had found that the bail applicant, along with other accused, were "playing hide and seek" with the trial court just to delay the progress of trial for about a year to give him an additional ground to apply for bail.

Gupta has been in jail custody since September 5, 2013. The high court rejected his first bail petition on January 29, 2014 and the second bail petition on November 14, 2014. While rejecting Gupta's bail plea for the third time on March 28, 2016, the high court had given him the liberty to apply for bail afresh if the trial was not concluded within the next one year. However, the high court, while adjudicating the fourth bail plea, found from the case records that though the trial court had framed the charges, filing of petitions by the accused persons had not stopped.

Even after supply of police papers, the petitioner (Deepak Gupta) and the other co-accused had filed petitions one after the other either for supply of documents or for discharge, which were to be dealt with by the trial court after hearing both sides.

The single-judge bench of Justice S.K. Sahoo said: "The trial would have progressed substantially had the dilly-dallying tactics not been adopted by the accused persons, including the petitioner. Therefore, I am of the view that the delay in progress of the trial in the factual scenario does not create an additional ground for grant of bail."

However, the high court expected the trial court not to delay the trial as it might hamper the result and the justice, which it was expecting due to the loss of more than Rs 1,500 crore to the government exchequer. The high court also expected the trial court "not to be a silent spectator or a mute observer".

"The trial court has got solemn duty to see that neither the prosecution nor the accused play truancy with the criminal trial or corrode the sanctity of the proceeding and thereby expropriate or hijack the community interest by conducting themselves in such a manner as a consequence of which the trial becomes a farcical one," Justice Sahoo said in his August 24 order, a copy of the full text of which is in possession of The Telegraph.

According to the court, the nature of accusation against Gupta is that he, in connivance with the mining, forest, revenue officials and mining lease holders, created fake documents and illegally excavated iron ore which caused pecuniary advantage to him, his family members and others and caused loss to the tune of more than Rs 1,500 crore to the government exchequer.

The high court felt the crime was committed "in a cool, calculated and organised manner", and a strong prima facie case was available against Gupta to show his involvement in the economic offence.

"In view of the severity of punishment in case of conviction, reasonable apprehension of tampering with the evidence, absence of any substantial change of circumstances after rejection of bail applications by this court thrice and particularly when the last bail rejection order of this court was affirmed by the Supreme Court by dismissing the special leave petition, I am not inclined to reconsider the prayer for bail and release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the bail application sans merit and hence stands rejected," Justice Sahoo observed.