The critical legal principle established is that a prima facie case must be evident for proceeding with criminal charges, emphasizing the necessity of corroborative evidence to ascertain guilt beyond mere suspicion.

JUDGMENT :

(Hasmukh D. Suthar, J.)

[1.0] Present Criminal Revision Application under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as “CrPC”) has been preferred by the applicant herein – M/s. Baccarose Perfumes and Beauty Products Private Limited through its Director and Authorised Signatory Nishant Kapurchandra Upadhyay seeking following prayers:

“(A) Your Lordships may be pleased to quash and set aside the impugned order dated 19.07.2017 passed by the learned Special Judge (CBI), Ahmedabad in CBI Special Case No.48 of 2010 and consequently, discharge the petitioner from the said proceedings;

(B) Pending hearing and final disposal of the present petition, Your Lordships may be pleased to stay further proceedings in respect of the trial pending before Court of the learned Special Judge (CBI), Ahmedabad in CBI Special Case No.48 of 2010;

(C) An ex-parte ad interim relief in terms of prayer (B) above may kindly be granted;”

[2.0] The brief facts of the case are as under:

[2.1] A regular case No.RC-6(A)/2005-GNR under Section 120-B read with Section 420 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860 (hereinafter referred to as “IPC”) and Sections 13 (2) read with Section 13 (1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1998 was registered at CBI, Gandhinagar Branch on 04.04.2005 on the basis of source information alleging therein that Shri Yogendra Garg, Joint Development Commissioner, Kandla Special Economic Zone, Kandla, Shri V.N. Jahagirdar, Deputy Commissioner of Customs, Kandla Special Economic Zone (KASEZ) and M/s. Baccarose Perfumes and Beauty Products Private Limited, KASEZ had entered into criminal conspiracy, during the period March, 2001 to August, 2004, to cause wrongful gain to themselves and corresponding wrongful loss to the Government. That in pursuance to the said criminal conspiracy and by abusing their official position they allowed M/s. Baccarose Perfumes and Beauty Products Private Limited to clear its goods into the Indian Market on payment of Countervailing Duty on Invoice value instead of Maximum Retail Price (MRP / RSP) thereby causing huge loss to the Government.

[2.2] After the investigation, Investigating Officer has been pleased to file the closure report before the learned Special Judge, CBI Court No.3, Ahmedabad. The learned Special Judge has been pleased to reject the closure report submitted by the Investigating Officer and subsequently directed to register the Special Case against the accused persons which subsequently came to be registered as Special Case No.48 of 2010 vide order dated 01.06.2010. The said order came to be challenged by the present applicant by way of Special Criminal Application No.1214 of 2010, which came to be dismissed by the coordinate Bench.

[2.3] Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the said order, present applicant approached the Hon’ble Supreme Court by way of filing Special Leave Petition (Cri.) No.14430 of 2013 wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court has been pleased to pass the following order.

“Heard learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner.

Delay condoned.

We are not inclined to interfere at this stage when the Special Judge has only taken cognizance and directed issue of summons to the petitioner. However, it will be open for the petitioner to raise appropriate pleas for discharge at the time of hearing of charges.

The special leave petition dismissed.”

In view of the above order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, present applicant preferred application Exh.57 before the learned Special Judge, CBI Court to discharge him, which application came to be dismissed by the learned Special Judge vide order dated 19.07.2017.

Hence, present