Madhya Pradesh High Court
Rajesh Kumar Mishra vs Central Bureau Of Investigation on 15 October, 2025
Author: Achal Kumar Paliwal
Bench: Achal Kumar Paliwal
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:52144
1 MCRC-43811-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ACHAL KUMAR PALIWAL
ON THE 15th OF OCTOBER, 2025
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 43811 of 2025
RAJESH KUMAR MISHRA
Versus
CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
Appearance:
Shri Shivam Hazari - Advocate for the applicant.
Shri Vikram Singh and Ms. Chetana Chouhan - Advocate for the
respondent/State/CBI.
ORDER
This is the bail application filed on behalf of applicant under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
2. The applicant is in jail since 11.09.2025 in connection with Crime No./RC No.0092025A0004 registered at P.S. Central Bureau of Investigation/ACB Jabalpur, District-Jabalpur for the offence punishable under Sections 7 and 7(A) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 as amended by the act of 2018 and also under Section 61(2) of the BNS, 2023.
3. Prosecution story in brief is that Case No. RC0092025A0004 has been registered at CBI, ACB, Jabalpur (M.P.) on 11.09.2025 U/s 61(2) of BNS, 2023 and U/s 7 and 7(A) of Prevention of Corruption Act,1988 (as amended in 2018) against Shri Nitesh Kumar Singh, Garrison Engineer, MES Office, Sagar Cant. Sagar (MP), Shri Rakesh Kumar Sahu, Assistant Signature Not Verified Signed by: VAISHALI AGRAWAL Signing time: 16-10-2025 11:57:42 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:52144 2 MCRC-43811-2025 Garrison Engineer, MES Office, Sagar Cant, Sagar (MP) and Shri Rajesh Mishra S/o Late D. K. Mishra middlemen, on the basis of a written complaint dated 08.09.2022, lodged by one Shri Ajay Kumar S/o Munna lal, R/o Mohalla- Gopalganj, Mauranipur. District-Jhansi.
4. It is mentioned in the complaint that M/s Balaji Associates was awarded a contract No. GE/SGR/06 of 2025-26 for repair and maintenance in area of AGE B/R-IIunder GE, Sagar. However, the accused MES officers did not handover the site for execution of despite passage of time. One Shri Rajesh Mishra, a middle men contacted Shri Narendra Kumar Gupta (proprietor M/s Balaji Associates) and informed that he had good relations with the MES officers and he can get the work done through them provided 2% of contact amount (i.e Rs 1,00,000/- is paid to them. Since the complainant (Attorney holder of M/s Shree Balaji Associates) did not want to pay the bribe, hence he lodged the written complaint with CBI.. That, a detailed verification of the complaint was conducted on 09.09.2025 by Shri Nitesh Bahadur Singh, Inspector, CBI, ACB, Jabalpur in the immediate presence of independent witness namely Shri Satyam Khare, CCTC, Railway Station Sagar. During the course of verification, the conversation held between the complainant and the suspects was got recorded in the IC recorder. The discreet verification revealed demand of bribe by the public servants through the Middleman Rajesh Mishra. Since, prima facie commission of cognizable offence was made out, accordingly FIR RC- 0092025A0004 was registered on 11.09.2025 u/s 61(2) of BNS,2023 and u/s 7 and 7(A) of PC Act, against Shri Nitesh Kumar Singh, Garrison Engineer;
Signature Not Verified Signed by: VAISHALI AGRAWAL Signing time: 16-10-2025 11:57:42NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:52144 3 MCRC-43811-2025 Shri Rakesh Kumar Sahu, Assistant Garrison Engineer: all O/o GE, MES Office, Sagar (MP) and Shri Rajesh Mishra (Middleman). The investigation of this case was entrusted to the undersigned.. That, thereafter the pre trap proceedings were drawn and a memo was prepared which was duly signed by the CBI team, the complainant and the independent witnesses. During the course of investigation of the above-mentioned case, a Trap was laid on 11.09.2025 to catch the accused public servants red handed. During the trap proceedings, the complainant met the middleman in the Office of GE, MES and he enquired about bringing the bribe amount, which was replied in affirmative by the complainant. Shri Rajesh Mishra, Middleman took the complainant to the office of Shri Rakesh Kumar Sahu, AGE and collected the bribe amount from the complainant. On being enquired about payment of 2% by the complainant, the middleman Shri Rajesh Mishra informed that he got reduced the bribe amount to 1.5%. Accordingly, he directed the complainant to pay only Rs. 80,000/- and keep them in two separate packets i.e. Rs. 40,000/- in each packet. Thereafter, the middleman went to the office of Shri Nitesh Kumar Singh, GE to handover the bribe amount of Rs. 40,000/- to him and complainant remained outside of the office. The middleman had a conversation with Shri Nitesh Kumar Singh, GE and the bribe amount was directed to be kept with Deepak Kumar, JE. This fact has been recorded in the CCTV installed in the office chamber of Shri Nitesh Kumar Singh, GE. Thereafter, as mutually agreed between the accused persons, the two packets of bribe amount of Rs. 40,000/- each were kept by the middle man in the office almirah of Shri Deepak Kumar, JE. After Signature Not Verified Signed by: VAISHALI AGRAWAL Signing time: 16-10-2025 11:57:42 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:52144 4 MCRC-43811-2025 delivery of the bribe amount, the complainant has given the pre determined signal by sending a whatsapp message as 'ok sir' to the mobile of 1O. Accordingly, the trap team rushed to the place and the tented amount was recovered from the almirah of Shri Deepak Kumar, JE as pointed out by the complainant in presence of the independent witnesses.. That, thereafter, the detailed post trap proceedings were prepared and recorded in the post trap memo in presence of independent witnesses, accused persons and CBI team. The search of office as well as house premises of the accused persons were conducted in presence of the independent witnesses. Thereafter, the accused applicant were arrested after 2300 hrs. on 11.09.2025 after explaining them the grounds of arrest. The information of the arrest was provided to the relatives of the concerned accused persons and duly recorded in the arrest memos.
5. It is mentioned in the complaint that M/s Balaji Associates was awarded a contract No. GE/SGR/06 of 2025-26 for repair and maintenance work in the area of AGE B/R-II under GE, Sagar. However, the accused MES officers did not handover the site for execution of despite passage of time. One Shri Rajesh Mishra, a middleman contacted Shri Narendra Kumar Gupta (proprietor M/s Balaji Associates) and informed that he had good relations with the MES officers and he can get the work done through them provided 2% of contact amount (i.e Rs 1,00,000/- is paid to them. Since the complainant (Attorney holder of M/s Shree Balaji Associates) did not want to pay the bribe, hence he lodged the written complaint with CBI.. That, a detailed verification of the complaint was conducted on 09.09.2025 by Shri Signature Not Verified Signed by: VAISHALI AGRAWAL Signing time: 16-10-2025 11:57:42 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:52144 5 MCRC-43811-2025 Nitesh Bahadur Singh, Inspector, CBI, ACB, Jabalpur in the immediate presence of independent witness namely Shri Satyam Khare, CCTC, Railway Station Sagar. During the course of verification, the conversation held between the complainant and the suspects were got recorded in the IC recorder. The discreet verification revealed demand of bribe by the public servants through the Middleman Rajesh Mishra. Since, prima facie commission of cognizable offence was made out. Accordingly FIR RC- 0092025A0004 was registered on 11.09.2025 u/s 61(2) of BNS,2023 and u/s 7 and 7(A) of PC Act, against Shri Nitesh Kumar Singh, Garrison Engineer, Shri Rakesh Kumar Sahu, Assistant Garrison Engineer: all O/o GE, MES Office, Sagar (MP) and Shri Rajesh Mishra (Middleman). The investigation of this case was entrusted to the undersigned. That, thereafter the pre-trap proceedings were drawn and a memo was prepared, which was duly signed by the CBI team, the complainant and the independent witnesses. During the course of investigation of the above-mentioned case, a Trap was laid on 11.09.2025 to catch the accused public servants red handedly. During the trap proceedings, the complainant met the middleman in the Office of GE, MES and he enquired about bringing the bribe amount, which was replied in affirmative by the complainant. Shri Rajesh Mishra, Middleman took the complainant to the office of Shri Rakesh Kumar Sahu, AGE and collected the bribe amount from the complainant. On being enquired about payment of 2% by the complainant, the middleman Shri Rajesh Mishra informed that he got reduced the bribe amount to 1.5%. Accordingly, he directed the complainant to pay only Rs.80,000/- and keep them in two separate packets Signature Not Verified Signed by: VAISHALI AGRAWAL Signing time: 16-10-2025 11:57:42 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:52144 6 MCRC-43811-2025 i.e. Rs. 40,000/- in each packet. Thereafter, the middleman went to the office of Shri Nitesh Kumar Singh, GE to handover the bribe amount of Rs.40,000/- to him and complainant remained outside of the office. The middleman had a conversation with Shri Nitesh Kumar Singh, GE and the bribe amount was directed to be kept with Deepak Kumar, JE. This fact has been recorded in the CCTV installed in the office chamber of Shri Nitesh Kumar Singh, GE.
6. Thereafter, as mutually agreed between the accused persons, two packets of bribe amount of Rs. 40,000/- each were kept by the middle man in the office Almirah of Shri Deepak Kumar, JE. After delivery of the bribe amount, the complainant has given the pre determined signal by sending a Whatsapp message as 'ok sir' to the mobile of IO. Accordingly, the trap team rushed to the place and the tainted amount was recovered from the almirah of Shri Deepak Kumar, JE as pointed out by the complainant in presence of the independent witnesses. That, thereafter, the detailed post trap proceedings were prepared and recorded in the post trap memo in presence of independent witnesses, accused persons and CBI team. The search of office as well as house premises of the accused persons were conducted in presence of the independent witnesses. Thereafter, the accused/applicant was arrested after 2300 hrs. on 11.09.2025 after explaining them the grounds of arrest. The information of the arrest was provided to the relatives of the concerned accused persons and duly recorded in the arrest memos.
7. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that against applicant, charge-sheet has been filed under Section7(A) of the Prevention of Signature Not Verified Signed by: VAISHALI AGRAWAL Signing time: 16-10-2025 11:57:42 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:52144 7 MCRC-43811-2025 Corruption Act as well as Section 61(2) of BNS. It is also urged that there is no evidence to show that applicant made any demand in the case. No amount has been recovered from present applicant. Nothing has been credited into the account of present applicant and he has been paid nothing. It is also urged that voice sample of applicant has been already taken. It is also urged that applicant's house has been searched and therein nothing objectionable has been found. There is CCTV footage in the office of applicant. After referring to para-66 of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Anr. 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 577, it is urged that therein Hon'ble Apex Court has not laid down any such law that in cases of present nature, applicant cannot be released on bail, instead it has been held in para-66 that therefore, it is not advisable on the part of the Court to categorize all the offences into one group and deny bail on that basis.
8. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that in the instant case, after investigation, charge-sheet has been filed. There is no possibility of applicant tampering with the evidence. It is also urged that in case o f Sanjay Chandra Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation (2012) 1 SCC 40, amount of Rs.1,658 crores was involved and in case of P. Chidambaram Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation (2020) 13 SCC 337, amount of Rs. 4.62 Crores was involved but still, Hon'ble Apex Court released Sanjay Chandra (Supra) and P. Chidambaram (Supra) on bail. Primary consideration while discussing the issue pertaining to grant of bail is that whether the accused will be available for trial or not. There are no criminal antecedents of present applicant. There is no direct evidence against present applicant. Applicant Signature Not Verified Signed by: VAISHALI AGRAWAL Signing time: 16-10-2025 11:57:42 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:52144 8 MCRC-43811-2025 has been falsely implicated in the case. Applicant is not a public servant. Therefore, he does come within the purview of PC Act. Ingredients of constituting offence under Section 7(A) of PC also not made out. It is also urged that complainant as well as applicant both are contractor in the same Department and complainant is competitor to present applicant. Therefore, on account of aforesaid, complainant has been falsely implicated present applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that as offence under Sections 7(A) and 13 of PC Act are punishable with maximum sentence of seven years, therefore, applicant comes within the purview of category A as mentioned in Satender Kumar Antil (Supra). Learned counsel for the applicant also submits that instant offence is punishable with a maximum sentence of seven years. Therefore, having regard to contents of provisions of Section of 480 of BNS, it is urged that applicant be released on bail.
9. Learned counsel for the respondent/CBI submits that Rajesh Mishra is the prime accused and he started all the things and demand was made through present applicant. Applicant is the middle man, who approached the concerned Officer. It is also urged that there is sufficient evidence against present applicant. In CCTV also, the act has been recorded. Status of accused itself shows that he is capable of tampering with the evidence. Present case pertains to serious economic offence. In this connection, he has referred to para-4 of Satender Kumar Antil (Supra) and para-4 of para wise reply to the grounds of the application. Prima-facie, offence under Section 7 (A) of the Prevention of Corruption Act against present applicant is made out. It is also urged that Investigation is still going Signature Not Verified Signed by: VAISHALI AGRAWAL Signing time: 16-10-2025 11:57:42 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:52144 9 MCRC-43811-2025 on and data from mobile allegedly seized in the case is yet to be recovered. During submissions of learned counsel for the respondent/CBI has extensively referred to the reply filed by him. With respect to aforesaid submissions, learned counsel for the respondent/State CBI has referred and relied upon Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Anr. 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 577, State of Gujarat Vs. Mohanlal Jitamalji Porwal & Anr. (1987) 2 SCC 364, Niranjan Hemchandra Sashittal Vs. State of Maharashtra (2013) 4 SCC 64, State Vs. Capt. Jagjit Singh AIR 1962 SC 253 and P. Chidambaram Vs. Central V Bureau of Investigation (2020) 12 SCC 337. On above grounds, he prays for dismissal of the application.
10. Heard. Perused record of the case.
11. This Court has examined the submission of learned counsel for the parties in the light of evidence available on record as well as in the light of principles laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court Satender Kumar Antil (Supra), Sanjay Chandra (Supra), P. Chidambaram Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation (2020) 13 SCC 337, Dileep Bhai Nanubhai (Supra), State of Gujarat (Supra), Niranjan Hemchandra (Supra), Capt. Jagjit Singh (Supra).
12. The case pertains to bribe of Rs.80,000/-. In the instant case, after investigation, charge-sheet has been filed. No custodial interrogation is required. In view of aforesaid, as well as having regard to factual matrix of the case as well as evidence available on record and principles laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in Satender Kumar Antil (Supra), Sanjay Chandra (Supra), P. Chidambaram Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation (2020) 13 SCC 337, Dileep Bhai Nanubhai (Supra), State of Gujarat (Supra), Niranjan Signature Not Verified Signed by: VAISHALI AGRAWAL Signing time: 16-10-2025 11:57:42 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:52144 10 MCRC-43811-2025 Hemchandra (Supra), Capt. Jagjit Singh (Supra), I deem it proper to release the applicant on bail.
13. It is directed that applicant be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court, for his regular appearance before the trial Court during trial with a condition that he shall remain present before the concerned Court on all the dates fixed by it during trial. He shall abide by all the conditions enumerated under Section 480(3) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
14. This order shall be effective till the end of the trial. However, in case of bail jump and breach of any of the conditions of bail, it shall become ineffective.
15. Soft copy of this bail order be sent immediately/forthwith to the applicant through concerned Jail Superintendent.
16. M.Cr.C. stands allowed and disposed of.
17. Certified copy as per rules.
(ACHAL KUMAR PALIWAL) JUDGE vai Signature Not Verified Signed by: VAISHALI AGRAWAL Signing time: 16-10-2025 11:57:42