Back
2013 Supreme(SC) 470
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
P. Sathasivam & M. Yusuf Eqbal, JJ.
Central Bureau of Investigation v.
Vs.
Vijay Sai Reddy
Criminal Appeal No. 729 of 2013 [Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 5946 of 2012], CRLP No. 4387 of 2012]
Decided On : 09 May, 2013
Mr. Ashok Bhan and Mr. Mukul Gupta, Senior Advocates, Mr. S. Nanda Kumar, Mr. D.L. Chhidanand, Ms. Anjali Chauhan and Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, Advocates, with them, for the appellant.
Mr. Raju Ramachandran and Mr. Sushil Kumar, Senior Advocates, Mr. Gopal Sankaranarayan, Mr. Niranjan Reddy, Mr. Subash Pothireddy, Mr. Madhur Panjwani and Mr. Senthil Jagadeesan, Advocates, with them, for the respondent.
Headnote:
Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 120-B, 409, 420, 477-A - Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 437 - Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - Section13 - Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 - Section 3 – Investigation - Cancellation of bail - Appeal is directed against final judgment and order passed by High Court of Judicature of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad in Criminal Petition whereby High Court dismissed petition filed by Central Bureau of Investigation appellant herein cancellation of bail granted to respondent - Orders of High Court of Andhra Pradesh in Petition CBI registered case being CBI Sections of Indian Penal Code and Prevention of Corruption Act against Member of Parliament others – Held, High Court having arrived definite conclusion that several findings of Special court are unacceptable or irrelevant but ultimately affirmed very same order of special Judge granting bail - While granting bail court has to keep in mind nature of accusations nature of evidence in support severity of punishment which conviction will entail character of accused circumstances which are peculiar to accused reasonable possibility of securing presence of accused at trial reasonable apprehension of witnesses being tampered with larger interests of public State and other similar considerations - Kept in mind that for purpose of granting bail Legislature has used words reasonable grounds for believing instead of evidence which means Court dealing with grant of bail can only satisfy as to whether there is genuine case against accused and that prosecution will be able to produce prima facie evidence in support of charge - This stage to have the evidence establishing guilt of accused beyond reasonable doubt - Appeal is allowed
JUDGMENT
P. Sathasivam, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. This appeal is directed against the final judgment and order dated 13.06.2012 passed by the High Court of Judicature of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad in Criminal Petition No. 4387 of 2012, whereby the High Court dismissed the petition filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI)-the appellant herein seeking cancellation of bail granted to the respondent herein.
Brief facts:
3. On the orders of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh in Writ Petition Nos. 794, 6604 and 6979 of 2011 dated 10.08.2011, the CBI, Hyderabad, on 17.08.2011, registered a case being R.C. No. 19(A)/2011-CBI-Hyderabad dated 17.05.2011 under Sections 120-B read with Sections 409, 420 and 477-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short IPC) and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(c) and (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (in short the PC Act) against Y.S. Jaganmohan Reddy (A-1), Member of Parliament and 73 others.
(b) V. Vijay Sai Reddy-the respondent herein was named as an accused at Sl. No. 2 in the FIR dated 17.08.2011 (after the charge-sheet was framed, he was arrayed as A-2 and hereinafter, he will be referred to as A-2). The respondent herein was the founder Director of M/s Jagathi Publications and was the Financial Advisor for the group of companies of Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy (A-1).
(c) He was arrested on 02.01.2012 and was in police custody from 04.01.2012 to 09.01.2012 and again from 11.01.2012 to 17.01.2012. On 27.01.2012, he filed an application for grant of regular bail under Section 437 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short the Code) before the Court of the Special Judge for CBI Cases at Hyderabad. The Special Judge, by order dated 21.03.2012, dismissed his application for bail.
(d) During investigation, it was revealed that M/s Jagathi Publications Pvt. Ltd. was originally incorporated as a private limited company on 14.11.2006 and later converted into a public limited company on 12.01.2009. At the relevant time, the respondent herein was the founder Director of the Company and Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy (A-1) was designated as the Authorised Signatory to operate the Bank accounts of the Company. He was appointed as a Director and Chairman with effect from 21.06.2007. It is alleged that A-1 floated M/s Jagathi Publications Pvt. Ltd. with an objective of conducting media business with the ill-gotten wealth. Most of the shareholders were alleged to be the benamis of Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy (A-1). Further, as a quid pro quo to these investments, the benefits were received by various investors including the companies/individuals from the decisions of the State Government in allotment of lands for Special Economic Zones (SEZs), contracts for irrigation projects, special relaxations/permissions for real estate ventures, mines etc. It is further revealed that Y.S. Jaganmohan Reddy (A-1) laundered the bribe money by routing it through various individuals and companies and getting investments made by them in his companies at a high premium.
(e) After investigation, on 31.03.2012, the CBI filed first charge sheet against A-1 to A-13 including the respondent herein under Section 120-B read with Sections 409, 420 and 477-A of the IPC and Sections 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(c) and (d) of the PC Act in the Court of Special Judge for CBI Cases, Hyderabad. On 02.04.2012, A-2 filed another application for grant of bail before the Special Judge. By order dated 13.04.2012, the Special Judge granted bail to A-2.
(f) Being aggrieved by the order dated 13.04.2012, the CBI filed Criminal Petition No. 3712 of 2012 before the High Court. The High Court, by order dated 20.04.2012, set aside the order dated 13.04.2012 and remanded the matter to the Court of Special Judge to consider the case of A-2 afresh. In the meantime, the Principal Special Judge for CBI Cases, Hyderabad took cognizance of the charge sheet dated 31.03.2012 against A-1 to A-13 which was numbered as CC No. 8 of 2012. On 30.04.2012, after hearing
