Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Pat) 1247
PATNA HIGH COURT
HONOURABLE MR. ANIL KUMAR SINHA, J
Shashi Shekhar – Appellant
Versus
The Central Bureau Of Investigation Through D. I. G. Of Police, A. C. B. – Respondent
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30307 of 2018
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. S. K. Shrivastava, Mr. Apurv Harsh, Mr. Manu Tripurari, Ms. Shubhi Shrivastava, Mr. Raghu Raj Pratap, Mr. Gaurav Sharma
For the Respondents: Mr. Avanish Kumar Singh, Mr. Ambar Narayan, Ms. Barkha, Mr. Mukul Kumar Singh
The court emphasized that for charges under the Prevention of Corruption Act, both demand and acceptance of illegal gratification must be established; circumstantial evidence can substitute direct proof if sufficient.
Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 120B - Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - Sections 7, 11, 12, 13(2), 13(1)(d) - Quashing of criminal proceedings - Petitioner alleged to have accepted illegal gratification of Rs. 12,28,800/- as part of conspiracy in capacity as Assistant Director - Legal requisites of demand and acceptance of bribe not conclusively established in charge sheet; lack of corroborative evidence presented by prosecution - No witnesses or complainants available for cross-examination against the petitioner - Court outlines scope of quashing under Section 482, emphasizing prima facie examination over extensive inquiry - Application dismissed, cognizance not found erroneous. (Paras 3, 12, 45, 48)
(B) Quashing of criminal proceedings - Jurisdiction of the court under Section 482 does not extend to detailed inquiry into merits of case; only a prima facie assessment is required to establish allegations. (Paras 32, 44)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner, a public servant, accused of accepting bribes while in office, was arrested after a raid yielded cash. The prosecution relied on a confession from a co-accused and telephonic conversations, while the petitioner denied demand and acceptance of bribes. (Paras 5, 8, 19)
Findings of Court:
Cognizance taken was not erroneous, with evidence warranting further proceedings despite the petitioner’s assertions of no substantial grounds for prosecution being established. (Paras 45, 48)
Issues: The main issues were whether demand and acceptance of bribes could be legally established with the current evidentiary sufficiency and the role of intercept evidence in the prosecution. (Paras 12, 48)
Ratio Decidendi: The court opined that for charges under the Prevention of Corruption Act, direct evidence of demand and acceptance is crucial; however, circumstantial evidence may suffice. Legal procedures for intercept evidence were also underscored as pivotal in determining admissibility. (Paras 38, 44)
Result: Application dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. allegations of illegal gratification against petitioner. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 10) |
| 2. insufficient evidence for bribe allegations. (Para 12 , 14 , 19 , 22) |
| 3. corruption detailed, evidence against petitioner. (Para 23 , 24 , 27 , 28) |
| 4. guidelines for quashing provisions under procedural law. (Para 30 , 31 , 32 , 33) |
| 5. application dismissed; trial to proceed. (Para 47 , 48 , 49) |
JUDGMENT AND ORDER
C.A.V.
Date : 07-03-2025
Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Counsel for the Central Bureau of Investigation.
2. This application, under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, has been filed for quashing the entire criminal proceedings of Special Case no. 03/2017 [R.C. No. 15 (A) /2017], registered under Section 12 0 B of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 7 , 12, 13(2) read with Section 13 (1) (d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 .
3. The prosecution case, as culled out from the records of this case, is as follows:
4. On 23.08.2017, the First Information Report, bearing RC0232017A0015 was registered under Section 12 0-B of the Indian Penal Code read with Sections 7 , 12, 13(2) and 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 at the Central Bureau of Investigation, ACB, Patna, against three accused persons, namely, Shashi Shekhar (petitioner), Raj Kumar Agarwal and Dilip Kumar Agrawal.
5. The petitioner, while posted and functioning as Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement(ED), Patna, during the year 2017, in conspiracy with Raj Kumar Agarwal of M/s Set Square Holding Private Limited, by abusing his official position as public servant, has been obtaining and accepting illegal gratification from different persons as a motive or reward for discharging his official duties and has illegally collected more than Rs. 10 lacs, which was parked with co-accused Raj Kumar Agarwal, a businessman with the motive to take back the same in the garb of a lawful income at a later date.
6. It has further been alleged that in pursuance of the above criminal conspiracy, the petitioner demanded from Raj Kumar Agarwal the proceeds of the illegal gratification to the tune of Rs. 10 lacs parked by him and kept with Raj Kumar Agarwal to be delivered to the petitioner in his office at Patna or at any other place along with some blank cheques through Dilip Kumar Agrawal, who is nephew and representative of Raj Kumar Agarwal.
7. After registration of the First Information Report, a trap team was constituted, consisting of CBI officials and two other independent witnesses, in line with the tip received from the source and it was informed to everyone that Shashi Shekhar is arriving at Patna Airport by GO AIR Flight No. G8-131 and will be landing at Patna at 02:10 PM on 23.08.2017 and after arrival at Patna, he was to go to his office situated at Bank Road, Patna. Thereafter, he would proceed to his residence situated at Flat no. 506, Maharaja Kameshwar Residential Complex, Fraser Road, Patna.
8. Acting on the said information, trap team waited discreetly at the exit gate of the Patna Airport. After sometime, the petitioner came out of the Airport with a red trolley bag and he boarded a Hyundai I10 car and proceeded towards his office. The Trap team followed him discreetly. The petitioner reached his office and went inside and after some time, he came out of his office and boarded a Maruti WagonR car and reached his residential flat. The petitioner came out of the car and went inside his residential flat. The Trap Team waited outside the residential complex of the petitioner and after some time, a person, whose face was similar to the photograph of Dilip Kumar Agrawal provided by the source, arrived with a white polythene bag on a coffee-coloured Honda Activa Scooty and he went inside the residential complex. After some time, Dilip Kumar Agrawal came out of the residential complex and started his Scooty. At that moment, one of the member of the Trap Team, namely, Nitesh Kumar, TLO, intercepted him and after disclosing h
