THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE J.SREENIVAS RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.4646 of 2025

ORDER

This Criminal Petition is filed under Sections 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘BNSS’) by the petitioner, who is arrayed as accused No.4, seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No.RC0352025A0004 of ACB Hyderabad Police Station, Hyderabad, registered for the offence punishable under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, ‘IPC’) and Sections 7 and 7A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

2. Heard Sri Ch. Ravinder, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri T. Srujan Kumar Reddy, learned Special Public Prosecutor for CBI, appearing on behalf of the respondent.

3. The prosecution's case, in brief, is that on 23.06. 2023, a master excel list was distributed to Circle 12(1), Circle 1(1), Ward 1(1), Ward 4(1), and Ward 12(1), instructing the Assessing Officers to issue notices to assessees/tax payers who requested significant refunds in their Income Tax Returns (ITRs). Subsequently, the Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-I, Hyderabad, promptly halted this initiative, instructing the respective wards and circles to cease the issuance of notices and delete the excel list. It is further case of the prosecution is that accused Nos. 1 and 2, who hold positions as Senior Tax Assistants, have disregarded the aforementioned order by Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-I, Hyderabad and illegally retained a copy of the Excel list with the intent to exploit the sensitive information related to the assessee. Accused No. 1 summoned individuals from the master list to the office, while accused No. 2 aided accused No.1 by providing the Permanent Account Numbers (PAN) of the assessees in Ward 4(1), which is the largest Ward, and transferred them to Ward 12(1) or Circle 12(1). Subsequently, both the accused sent emails from their respective branches' official accounts and instructed the assessees to submit necessary documentation in support of their refund claims. Accused Nos. 1 and 2 conspired with other Income Tax Officers, i.e., accused Nos. 3 to 5 and one private individual, i.e., accused No. 6, who is a Chartered Accountant, to channel bribes from the assessees to the accounts of the accused Income Tax Officers under the pretense of imposing substantial penalties. Accused Nos. 1 to 5 directly contacted the taxpayers/assessees on their mobile phones and instructed them to respond to the emails regarding the refund issue; failure to do so resulted in threats of significant penalties. Under the guise of imposing penalties on refunds sought by the assessees, they solicited bribes from them. The accused cleverly used the term penalty to lead the assessees to believe that they were making a payment to the Government rather than a bribe. Subsequently, after agreeing on penalty payments with the assessees, accused Nos. 1 to 5 provided the mobile number of accused No. 6 to the taxpayers/assessees. Accused No. 6 would attend the calls from them under the pretense of rectifying the ITRs as instructed by the Income Tax Officers and collected bribe payments from them. Therefore, the Anti-Corruption Bureau (herein referred to as 'ACB') has initiated the present case against the petitioner and the other accused for the above-mentioned offences.

4.1 Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has not committed any offence and he was falsely implicated in the present crime. He further submitted that major allegations are levelled against accused Nos. 1, 2, and 6, and they are the prime accused, who are involved in the entire episode and there are no specific allegations levelled against the petitioner to attract the ingredients of Section 420 of IPC and Sections 7 and 7A of the Act. He further submitted that the petitioner came to know that the complaint was registered based on an e-mail received from one of the assessee through the E-filing portal, in which the allegations are lev