Evidence of being caught red-handed is critical in denying bail under the Prevention of Corruption Act, despite the necessity of a demand for the offence.

JUDGMENT :

Parthivjyoti Saikia, J.

Heard Mr. M. Biswas, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. M. Kumari, the learned Standing Counsel, C.B.I.

2. This is an application under Section 483 of the BNS S , 2023, whereby the petitioner Maisnam Riten Kumar Singh who was arrested in connection with FIR No.RC01725A0012 under Sections 61 (2) of the , 2023 read with Section 7 , 7A, 8, 9, 10 and 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

3. M/s. Mohan Lal Jain was constructing the 4-Lane highway of National Highway No.37 between Demow and Moran Bypass. The work was scheduled to be completed by July, 2024. But the work was not completed. Therefore, M/s. Mohan Lal Jain decided to apply for grant of extension of time as well as for a completion certificate. Accordingly, they applied.

4. The partner of the said firm namely, Binod Kumar Jain and Amit Jain have decided to come to Guwahati to meet the present petitioner Maisnam Riten Kumar Singh who was working as the Executive Director and R.O. of NHIDCL at Guwahati.

5. The respondent CBI came to know that partners of the said firm would be paying bribe to the petitioner to get those certificates. Therefore, a trap was laid.

6. On 14.10.2025, Binod Kumar Jain handed over a cash amount of Rs.10 lacs to the petitioner Maisnam Riten Kumar Singh in his office chamber. Money was immediately recovered by the CBI team.

7. Mr. Biswas has submitted that demand is the sine qua non of the offence under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act. According to Mr. Biswas, the petitioner never demanded money from Binod Kumar Jain.

8. Mr. Biswas has submitted that Binod Kumar Jain who was also arrested in this case has already been released on bail by this Court. Mr. Biswas further submitted that the petitioner is a patient of hypertension and type 2 diabetes.

9. The learned counsel Mr. Biswsas has submitted that the petitioner was never caught red handed while accepting the money. Mr. Biswas has submitted that in this case, the provision of law as laid down in Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act is not attracted.

10. Ms. Kumari has submitted that the petitioner Maisnam Riten Kumar Singh was caught red handed while accepting the bribe in lieu of issuing extension of time and work completion certificate. Ms. Kumari has submitted that the house of the petitioner was also searched and that unaccounted amount of Rs.2,56,75,000/- was recovered. For that purpose, another case being RC No.0172025A0013 was registered.

11. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides.

12. The trap team entered in the chamber of the petitioner Maisnam Riten Kumar Singh after Binod Kumar Jain had handed over the money to him. Binod Kumar Jain was also detained immediately and the money was recovered from the possession of the petitioner. There are materials for a prima facie criminal case against the present petitioner.

13. Thus, this Court is of the opinion that under the given circumstances, the petitioner is not entitled to be released on bail. The bail application of the petitioner Maisnam Riten Kumar Singh is rejected and disposed of accordingly.