Pradeep Hazari vs. Central Bureau Of Investigation

Held

The Court allowed the bail applications. Considering that the applicants had been in custody for approximately one month and the learned senior counsel for the applicants provided an undertaking that they would not influence any witnesses and would cooperate with the further investigation, the Court found it appropriate to grant bail. The Court directed that the applicants be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 5,00,000/- each with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court. The applicants were also directed to comply with Section 437(3) of the Cr.P.C. The Court explicitly stated that if the applicants are found to be influencing any witnesses, the bail order would stand automatically cancelled, and the authorities would be at liberty to take them into custody. No issues were expressly left undecided.

Facts

This judgment concerns multiple bail applications filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. by CGST officers, including Somen Goswami, Pradeep Hazari, Vikas Kumar Gupta, Virendra Jain, and Kapil Kambley. They are in custody since June 14, 2023, in connection with a CBI ACB Jabalpur case (RC0092023A0005) for offenses under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The prosecution alleges that following a raid and sealing of two firms belonging to Bhagirath Rai on May 18, 2023, a demand of Rs. 35 Lakhs was made for releasing the seized material and factory. An initial payment of Rs. 25 Lakhs was made on June 5, 2023, with the remaining Rs. 10 Lakh promised later. A complaint was lodged on June 12, 2023, leading to a trap and recovery of the remaining amount from the applicants.

Key Issues

1. Whether the applicants, who are CGST officers, are entitled to bail under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. given their period of custody and the allegations of demanding and accepting illegal gratification. Petitioner's arguments: The applicants contend they have been falsely implicated. They argue that an initial amount of Rs. 25 Lakhs was paid without complaint, and later, a complaint alleging a demand of Rs. 7 Lakhs was made. They highlight that a release order was issued on June 8, 2023, negating any grounds for demanding further amounts. They also point out that the CBI has sought their judicial custody, indicating no further custodial interrogation is required. Given their nearly one-month custody, they seek release on bail. Respondent's arguments: The CBI opposes the bail applications, submitting that the investigation is ongoing and there is an apprehension that the applicants, being departmental officers, may influence witnesses.