Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Supreme Court - Daily Orders

Amandeep Singh Dhall vs Central Bureau Of Investigation on 25 October, 2024

Author: Surya Kant

Bench: Surya Kant

     ITEM NO.2                               COURT NO.4                  SECTION II-C

                                    S U P R E M E C O U R T O F     I N D I A
                                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

     Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s).12036/2024

     (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 04-06-2024
     in BA No.2229/2023 passed by the High Court Of Delhi At New Delhi)

     AMANDEEP SINGH DHALL                                                  Petitioner(s)

                                                      VERSUS

     CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION                                       Respondent(s)

     (IA No. 198286/2024 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED
     JUDGMENT, IA No. 198287/2024 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T., IA
     No.215276/2024 - INTERIM BAIL, IA No. 217859/2024 - PERMISSION TO
     FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES, IA No. 198288/2024 -
     PERMISSION TO FILE LENGTHY LIST OF DATES)

     Date : 25-10-2024 These matters were called on for hearing today.

     CORAM :                   HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT
                               HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN

     For Petitioner(s)                   Mr. Siddharth Dave, Sr. Adv.
                                         Mr. Vedant Varma, Adv.
                                         Mr. Adit Pujari, Adv.
                                         Mr. Shashwat Sarin, Adv.
                                         Ms. Sharya Mittala, Adv.
                                         Ms. Sukanya Lal, AOR

     For Respondent(s)                  Mr. Rajkumar Bhaskar Thakare, A.S.G.
                                        Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR
                                        Mr. Kartikey Asthana, Adv.
                                        Mr. B K Satija, Adv.
                                        Mr. Sudhir Nagar, Adv.
                                        Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv.
                                        Mr. Chitvan Singhal, Adv.

                               UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
                                                  O R D E R

1. Signature Not Verified The petitioner seeks his enlargement on bail in RC Digitally signed by ARJUN BISHT Date: 2024.10.25 No.003/2022/A/0053 dated 17.08.2022 under Section 120-B read with 17:46:04 IST Reason:

Section 477-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 7 of the 1 Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

2. The controversy pertains to the framing and implementation of excise policy for the year 2021-2022 in the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi, allegedly to facilitate monopolization of wholesale and retail liquor trade in Delhi and the windfall profits for the vendors. It is further alleged that the policy was manipulated so that the high-ups in the Government could secure kickbacks. The petitioner before us was the Executive Director of his family owned company – Brindco. He was part of the WhatsApp group titled “Delhi Liquor Sales Association” where some confidential documents regarding the excise policy were allegedly shared before they were published. The aforesaid manipulations led to registration of subject FIR in which though the petitioner was not initially named, but he came to be arrested on 18.04.2023 by CBI. The petitioner is in custody since then. In addition to the aforesaid case, the petitioner was also accused of committing offence under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, where he was arrested by the Directorate of Enforcement on 01.03.2023.

3. Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Solicitor General of India on behalf of CBI, record persued.

4. It is not in dispute that:

(i) The petitioner has already been enlarged on bail in the PMLA case by the Delhi High Court.
(ii) The petitioner’s main co-accused in the instant CBI case, including the then Chief Minister of NCT of Delhi, have been enlarged on bail.
2
(iii) After filing of the first charge-sheet, three supplementary charge-sheets have also been filed, which include one of the charge-sheet against the petitioner. The investigation is, thus, more or less complete.
(iv) The trial, however, is yet to formally commence.
(v) There are approximately 300 witnesses which CBI proposes to examine and as such the conclusion of trial will take some reasonable time.
(vi) The petitioner is already in custody for more than 1½ years.
(vii) Retention of the petitioner in judicial custody will not serve any purpose.

5. Keeping the above-stated factors, however, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant special leave petition is disposed of and the petitioner is directed to be released on bail subject to furnishing bail bonds and such terms and conditions as may be imposed by the Trial Court. The petitioner shall continue to appear before the Trial Court on each and every date of hearing, failing which it shall be deemed to be misuse of the concession of bail.

6. The special leave petition is, accordingly, disposed of.

7. All pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

(ARJUN BISHT)                                                (PREETHI T.C.)
ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS                                      ASSISTANT REGISTRAR




                                          3