$~

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: 20.03.2025 + CRL.M.C. 7/2025 RAVI MOHAN SHARMA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Pramod Kumar Dubey, Sr.

Adv. with Mr. Nishank Mattoo, Ms. Pinky Dubey, Mr. Prince Kumar, Mr. Ramachandruni B. Siddhartha, Ms. Swati, Mr. Rishabh Munjal and Ms. Tanya Sharma, Advs.

versus C.B.I. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Ravi Sharma SPP, CBI, Mr.

Swapnil Choudhary, Mr. Ishann Bhardwaj, Mr. Sagar and Ms.

Madhulika Rai Sharma, Advs.

CORAM:

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE SWARANA KANTA SHARMA

JUDGMENT

DR. SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J.

CRL.M.C. 7/2025 & CRL.M.A. 69/2025 (stay)

1. The petitioner assails the order dated 16.12.2024 [hereafter „the impugned order‟] passed by the learned Special Judge (PC Act)/CBI-11, Rouse Avenue District Courts, New Delhi [hereafter „the Trial Court‟] in CC No. 264/2019, titled „CBI vs. Ravi Mohan Sharma & Ors.‟

CRL.M.C. 7/2025 Page 1 of 29 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed

2. Issue notice. Mr. Ravi Sharma, the learned SPP accepts notice on behalf of the CBI.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

3. Background facts of the case are that a case bearing RC-11(A)/ 2014/CBI/AC-III/New Delhi was registered on 22.10.2014 by the Anti-Corruption Branch of the Central Bureau of Investigation [hereafter „CBI‟] under Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 [hereafter „IPC‟] and Sections 7, 11, and 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 [hereafter „PC Act‟]. The FIR contained allegations that petitioner i.e. accused no. 1, Ravi Mohan Sharma, a public servant, while serving as Director, Traffic Transportation (Coaching-1), Railway Board, Government of India, had entered into a criminal conspiracy with certain private individuals and facilitated the hiring of railway coaches in exchange for illegal gratification in the form of a cash amount of ₹5 lakhs. It is the case of the prosecution that the petitioner was caught red-handed while accepting the bribe of ₹5 lakhs at his residence.

4. The present case was registered based on source information, and during the initial course of investigation, the mobile phones of the suspected individuals, including the petitioner, were placed under surveillance. The conversations from the monitored calls were recorded, and a CD containing 182 audio files was sent for comparison with the voice samples of the accused and other suspected persons. The Central Forensic Science Laboratory CRL.M.C. 7/2025 Page 2 of 29 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed [hereafter „CFSL‟] had examined the audio files and provided a positive report, stating that the voices in the recorded conversations were the probable voices of the individuals whose specimen samples had been sent for comparison. Upon completion of investigation, the charge-sheet was filed on 20.12.2014. Thereafter, the supplementary chargesheet was filed on 10.12.2015 and the investigation was concluded. Charges were framed against petitioner Ravi Mohan Sharma, accused no. 2 Kumar Vadilal Shah, accused no. 3 Rajesh Champaklal Jodhani, and accused no. 4 M/s Rail Tour India LLP. During the trial, sixty-five (65) prosecution witnesses were examined, and the prosecution's evidence was closed vide order dated 21.05.2024. Thereafter, the statements of the accused persons under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [hereafter „Cr.P.C.‟] were being recorded.

5. At this stage, the CBI had filed an application under Section 91 read with Section 311 of the Cr.P.C. seeking liberty to place on record the work-sheets prepared during the spectrographic examination of the voice samples of the suspected persons, including the accused herein, conducted by Dr. Manisha Kulshrestha, Senior Scientific Officer, CFSL with the assistance of Sh. Jayesh Bhardwaj, Senior Scientific Assistant, CFSL. Directions were also sought that Sh. Jayesh Bhardwaj, Senior Scientific Assistant may be summoned and examined as an additional prosecution witness.

6. The learned Trial Court was pleased to allow the aforesaid ap