Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Surya Kant, J.K. Maheshwari, JJ.
Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr. – Appellant
Versus
Santosh Karnani & Anr. – Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 1148 of 2023 [Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 295 of 2023]
With
Rupesh Balwantbhai Brambhatt – Appellant
Versus
Santosh Karnani & Ors. – Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 1149 of 2023 [Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 724 of 2023]
Decided On : 17-04-2023
(A) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 438 – Anticipatory bail – No straitjacket formula can be applied for grant or refusal of anticipatory bail – Judicial discretion of Court shall be guided by various relevant factors and largely it will depend upon facts and circumstances of each case – Court must draw delicate balance between liberty of an individual as guaranteed under Article 21 of Constitution and need for a fair and free investigation, which must be taken to its logical conclusion – Arrest has devastating and irreversible social stigma, humiliation, insult, mental pain and other fearful consequences – Regardless thereto, when Court, on consideration of material information gathered by Investigating Agency, is prima facie satisfied that there is something more than a mere needle of suspicion against accused, it cannot jeopardise investigation, more so when allegations are grave in nature. (Para 24)
(B) Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 – Section 7 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 438 – Grant of anticipatory bail – Challenge as to – Bribery charges – Corruption poses a serious threat to our society and must be dealt with iron hands – It not only leads to abysmal loss to public exchequer but also tramples good governance – Common man stands deprived of benefits percolating under social welfare schemes and is worst hit – There appears to be a well-organized syndicate comprising officers and officials of Income Tax Department, businessmen and Hawala traders, who are in tandem – Such a nexus needs to be unearthed through an unimpaired and unobstructed investigation – Impugned judgment set aside and anticipatory bail application dismissed. (Paras 31, 32, 37 and 40)
(C) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Sections 437(5) and 439(2) – Cancellation of bail – Cancellation of bail must be done only for cogent and overwhelming reasons – Nevertheless, setting aside an unjustified order granting bail is distinct from cancellation of bail – This Court would not, invariably intervene into judicial discretion exercised by High Court while granting bail to an accused – All that to be ensured is that High Court exercises its discretion judiciously, cautiously and strictly in conformity with basic principles laid down by this Court from time to time in a series of decisions. (Para 35)
Facts of the case:
Appellants in the two Criminal Appeals, the Central Bureau of Investigation & complainant respectively, are aggrieved by the order dated 19th December, 2022 passed by High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad allowing the anticipatory bail application filed by Respondent No. 1 in connection with FIR registered as C.R. No. RC0292022A0011 of 2022 before CBI/ACB/Gandhi Nagar Police Station, for offence under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 as amended in 2018.
Findings of Court:
This Court has expressed only prima facie opinion on the merits of the allegations for the limited purpose to refuse or grant pre-arrest bail. If Respondent No. 1 moves application for grant of regular bail before appropriate Court, same shall be considered on its own merits and in accordance with law.
Result : Appeals allowed.
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| October 2023 | Training and updating of the assistant on legal concepts including ratio decidendi, conclusion, and summary (!) |
JUDGMENT :
Surya Kant, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. The Appellants in the two Criminal Appeals, the Central Bureau of Investigation & Rupesh Balwantbhai Brambhatt (hereinafter, “complainant”) respectively, are aggrieved by the order dated 19th December, 2022 passed by the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad allowing the anticipatory bail application filed by Respondent No. 1 in connection with FIR registered as C.R. No. RC0292022A0011 of 2022 before CBI/ACB/Gandhinagar Police Station, District Gandhinagar for the offence under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 as amended in 2018.
BACKGROUND
3. The complainant is a businessman engaged in the construction business that goes by the name: Safal Construction Pvt. Ltd. In February 2019, Respondent No. 1, an IRS Officer, posted as Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Ahmedabad, conducted a survey for the financial year 2018-19 under Section 133A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against Safal Construction Pvt. Ltd. whereunder the group disclosed an additional income of Rs. 50 crores.
4. Thereafter, in September 2021, search and seizure action was initiated by the Investigation Wing of Income Tax Department, Ahmedabad against Safal Construction Pvt. Ltd. Following these searches, some papers related to the complainant’s business were seized and the Central Circle, Range-1 Division initiated the procedure for raising a demand notice. It is the complainant’s case that he found out that Respondent No. 1 was handling his case and would be preparing the appraisal memo. Subsequently, the complainant and Respondent No. 1 met frequently in connection with the case and it is alleged that during these interactions, Respondent No. 1 threatened to ruin the complainant’s business and demanded illegal gratification.
5. On 29th September, 2022, Respondent No. 1 allegedly contacted the complainant and told him to meet him on 3rd October, 2022. Accordingly, the complainant met Respondent No. 1 at the Income Tax Office where Respondent No. 1 demanded illegal gratification of Rs. 30 lakhs to help the complainant with his case. This conversation was recorded by the complainant on a Digital Voice Recorder which has been handed over to the investigating authorities and a transcript of the same has also been provided to this Court. The complainant was directed to deposit the amount in the account of one Vardhman in the Dhara Angadia Firm.
6. The complainant lodged a complaint the next morning with ACB Police Station, Ahmedabad city at 07:15 hours and a trap was then laid. The complainant’s employee was sent to the Angadia firm with the bribe money amounting to Rs. 30 lakhs along with personnel from the ACB trap team. Upon depositing Rs. 30 lakhs with Dhara Angadia firm, the complainant contacted Respondent No. 1 through WhatsApp call which was recorded by the ACB team wherein Respondent No. 1 acknowledged payment of the amount. Immediately thereafter, one ACB team went to detain and arrest Respondent No. 1, who along with some staff members, is alleged to have physically assaulted the ACB team and escaped from the office due to the ensuing chaos. It is also claimed that Respondent No. 1, while escaping from the office, handed over his mobile phone to a colleague. Simultaneously, another ACB team recovered the bribe amount deposited with Dhara Angadia.
7. FIR No. 12/2022 was thus, registered against Respondent No. 1 under Sections 7, 13(1) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 on 4th October, 2022.
8. Owing to the gravity of the case, on 12th October, 2022, the case was transferred to the Central Bureau of Investigation (hereinafter, “CBI”) and FIR No. 12/2022 was reregistered as C.R. No. RC0292022A0011 of 2022 under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The FIR records that Respondent No. 1 evaded arrest by the ACB team and was still at large at the time of re-registration of the FIR.
9. Thereafter, a notice under Section 41A, Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter, “CrPC”) was
(1) Court should be slow in granting anticipatory bail in corruption cases.(2) Cancellation of bail must be done only for cogent and overwhelming reasons – Nevertheless, setting aside an unjustified ....
The court emphasized the delicate balance between personal liberty and societal interest in deciding anticipatory bail applications, considering the nature and gravity of the accusation, the accused'....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
