4. Corruption and corrupt practices-One cannot be tried and punished twice for the charge based on the same allegation and evidence in the same transaction-No bar existed in filing the separate references in the separate transactions involving the similar allegation but one cannot be charged for the second time for the same allegation on the basis of same evidence-Separate trial in more than one references of similar nature relating to the separate transaction can continue but in the light of the rule that one should not be vexed twice for the dame cause the prosecution of the accused on the basis of the same allegation and same evidence in more than one reference would not be legal-Perusal of documents placed on record, in the present case, in support of legal character of the property involved in the reference, would create a reasonable doubt about the correctness of the allegation and consequently, in absence of any other evidence, it would be difficult to form an opinion, that the accused by making concealment of assets in the income tax return and supplying incorrect information to the Income-tax Department, committed the offence with which he was being charged or the concealment was made with the intention to evade the income tax-Unless the prosecution, prima facie, satisfies the Court about the culpability of a person, the bail to him cannot be withheld merely on the basis of presumption of guilt and the essential question for determination in such circumstances would be regarding the true character of the transaction and the nature of offence which was allegedly committed-Unless in the light of evidence in the hands of prosecution, the case is brought within the parameters of expression “reasonable grounds” to believe that the offence with which a person was being charged was committed by him, the bare accusation would not be sufficient to curtail his liberty.