The court ruled that allegations in an FIR must disclose a prima facie case for investigation, and mere recovery of cash without evidence linking the accused to a bribery transaction does not suffice under the Prevention of Corruption Act.

JUDGMENT :

A.K. Mohapatra, J.

1. The abovenoted CRLMC No.1252 of 2025 has been filed with a prayer to quash the FIR No. RC2172024A0017, dated 07.12.2024, lodged on behalf of the Central Bureau of Investigation, Anti-Corruption-II, New Delhi, pending before the Court of the Learned Special Judge, CBI-I, Bhubaneswar as R.C. No.17(A) of 2024, for commission of offences under sections 7, 8, 9 and 10 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (“PC Act”) read with section 61(2) of the BNS, 2023.

Likewise, CRLMC No.347 of 2025 has been filed by the Petitioner-Company with a prayer to quash the summons dated 17.12.2024 & 24.12.2024 under Annexure-1 Series issued by the Central Bureau of Investigation, Anti-Corruption-II, in R.C. No. 17(A) of 2024, which arises out of the FIR No. RC2172024A0017, dated 07.12.2024, which has been registered for commission of offence under sections 7, 8, 9 and 10 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (“PC Act”) read with section 61(2) of the BNS, 2023.

2. The factual matrix in both CRLMC No.1252 of 2025 and CRLMC No.347 of 2025 is identical and arises from the same FIR. The Petitioner in CRLMC No.1252 of 2025 is the Managing Director of the Company which figures as the Petitioner in CRLMC No. 347 of 2025. Accordingly, both matters were heard analogously for the sake of convenience, with CRLMC No.1252 of 2025 being treated as the lead matter for purposes of analysis of the factual backgrounds of both the above noted applications.

FACTS OF THE CASE

3. The crux of the factual background of the present case, as culled out from the copy of the FIR and the Observation-cum-Recovery Memorandum (“the Memo”), under Annexure-1 and Annexure-2 respectively (of CRLMC No.1252 of 2025), in brief, is as follows; Initially, M/s Bridge and Roof Co. India Pvt. Ltd. (“BRCIL”) had been awarded certain tenders from the National Aluminum Company Limited (“NALCO”) pertaining to some civil construction work, which was then entrusted to M/s. Penta A Studio Pvt. Ltd. (“PENTA”). Certain information from a source was received by the CBI that one Mr.Chanchal Mukherjee, the Group General Manager of BRCIL, might be indulging in corrupt and illegal activities in the matter of “awarding work orders and clearing bills” in lieu of obtaining undue advantage.

4. The FIR further reveals that on 06.12.2024, Mr.Mukherjee had asked one Mr.Santosh Moharana, Director of PENTA, and his father Mr.Mana Mohan Moharana to meet him at his office concerning some urgent matter. It was during this meeting held on 06.12.2024 at his Bhubaneswar office, that Mr.Mukherjee demanded a bribe of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs) form Mr.Moharana. The bribe was to be delivered on 07.12.2024 and would apparently be adjusted towards the future billings of Mr.Moharana.

5. Upon receiving such information, the CBI team members along with some independent witnesses arrived near the office of Mr.Mukherjee on the aforesaid date and, upon reaching the forest park road, Bhubaneswar, followed a car (Hyundai Creta) which was occupied by both Mr.Mukherjee and Mr.Moharana. The car then reached a café (Mamma Mia) near Mayfair Hotel in Bhubaneswar and the above named two persons were joined by the present Petitioner. After a few minutes, it was observed that the Petitioner exited the car (Hyundai Creta) with a carry bag, which he then deposited on the right side rear seat of his Mercedes car that was kept nearby. Afterwards, the Petitioner entered the café. Finally, the CBI team, in presence of independent witnesses, confronted the aforesaid persons, whereupon it was discovered that the carry bag kept in the