Gujarat High Court
Sumit Suresh Bhatnagar vs Central Bureau Of Investigation on 13 July, 2020
Author: Sonia Gokani
Bench: Sonia Gokani
R/CR.MA/8632/2020 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 8632 of 2020
==========================================================
SUMIT SURESH BHATNAGAR
Versus
CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR VIRAT G POPAT(3710) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR RC KODEKAR, SPL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,DS AFF.NOT FILED (R)
(71) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MS MD MEHTA, ADDL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR(2) for the Respondent(s) No.
2
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI
Date : 13/07/2020
ORAL ORDER
1.Rule has been made returnable on 03.07.2020. The applicant has preferred this successive bail application under section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for regular bail for having been arrested in connection with RC No.RC0292018A0006 dated26.03.2018 registered with CBI/ACB, Gandhinagar for the offences under sections 120B read with section 429, 467,468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code and section 13(2) and 13(1)(b) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1998.
2. This Court in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.8435 of 2019 granted interim bail in favour of the present applicant on 18.06.2019 with certain elaborate conditions. This was on account of the need for the CBI to carry on further investigation and complete the Page 1 of 8 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 15 21:21:08 IST 2020 R/CR.MA/8632/2020 ORDER same. Liberty was reserved of the applicant to move an application for regular bail. However, his application for regular bail had been converted into an application for interim bail and was allowed accordingly. This was for the period of three months.
3. Thereafter, once again, another application being Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 16568 of 2019 on 20.09.2019 was moved. In the said application, interim bail came to be extended for the period of 04 months, where all conditions imposed by this Court were identical to what had been imposed at the first occasion.
4. Yet another application being Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 23669 of 2019 had been preferred, which was allowed by this Court on 10.01.2020 for the period of 06 months. Order came to be passed was as follows:-
"1. Seeking extension of the interim bail granted by this Court on 20.09.2019 so also for release on regular bail in connection with R.C. No. 0292018A0006, registered with the CBI/ACB, Gandhinagar, the applicants original accused are before this Court by way of the present applications.
2. After this Court issued rule, affidavit-in-reply is filed by the Dy.S.P., Shri. P.K. Godeshwar, for and on behalf of respondent No.1-CBI, where, he has stated that the further investigation is going on. After giving the chronology of the events, he has also detailed the alleged role of the applicants-accused, herein. According to the IO, the investigation of the case is going on, as the period of offence and the volume of documents are huge, it would require more time to complete the same. He also has urged that economic offences, since, constitute a class apart, as is held by the Apex Court in the case of 'Y.S. JAGAN MOHAN REDDY VS. CBI' in Criminal Appeal Page 2 of 8 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 15 21:21:08 IST 2020 R/CR.MA/8632/2020 ORDER No. 730 of 2013, Dated: 09.05.2013, this Court needs to keep in mind the reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with, the larger interest of the public or state etc. He also has narrated, as to how, the investigation has revealed the role of the applicants- accused and the manner in which the company started defaulting by way of development of LCs from the year 2009, itself. It is, further, urged that the outstanding amount is huge, which comes to Rs.23.62/- crore (rounded off). The IO has also, on the ground of the continuation of the further investigation and the possibility of the accused-applicants tampering with the evidence or influencing the witness, made a request not to allow the regular bail application of the accused- applicants.
3. This Court has heard the learned Advocate. Mr. Popat, for the applicants and the learned Spl. Public Prosecutor, Mr. Kodekar, for respondent No.1-CBI.
4. They both also have been heard, extensively, on the aspect of interim bail as well as regular bail, as has been sought by the accused-applicants.
5. On a specific query raised by this Court, with regard to the interference on the part of the accused-applicants or their having breached any of the conditions imposed by this Court, learned Spl. Public Prosecutor, Mr. Kodekar, has answered the same in negation. He also does not point out anywhere any misuse of the liberty granted by this Court or breach of any condition by the accused- applicants.
5.1 On a query raised by this Court, with regard to possible time required to complete the investigation, the learned Spl. Public Prosecutor is unable to quantify the time, in wake of the hugeness of the documents and also the magnitude of the alleged infraction of various provisions of law and rules.
5.2 This Court, while allowing the request of the the accused applicants of interim bail on 20.09.2019, has taken note of the disclosure of the immovable properties of theirs, the list of which had been given, for the first time, when the Court had passed the order on 18.06.2019. The IO has not been able to find out any other / new property nor is it his case that there has been non-disclosure of any property by the accused Page 3 of 8 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 15 21:21:08 IST 2020 R/CR.MA/8632/2020 ORDER applicants. Since, this Court has already given the detailed reasons, while acceding to the request of the accused-applicants for continuing interim bail, while further investigation continues, no separate reasons are needed for grant of extension and those given earlier shall govern the field. Their request to that extent for interim bail deserves to be acceded to.
6. Resultantly, both the applications are ALLOWED and the interim bail granted to the accused-applicants is extended for the further period of SIX MONTHS, on the same terms and conditions, EXCEPT, Condition No. 14 (F), as is enumerated in the order of this Court dated 20.09.2019, which shall be for the entire State of Gujarat, i.e. the applicants shall NOT LEAVE the State of Gujarat without the prior permission of the Court concerned. However, in the event of their requirement to travel outside the State of Gujarat, they shall be at liberty to make a REQUEST to the trial Court concerned, which shall consider the same, in accordance with law, as and when such occasion arises.
6.1 So far as the further investigation is concerned, this Court is NOT binding the IO with any specific time-limit, however, he shall endeavor to complete the same on expeditious basis.
7. This Court has not entered into the MERITS, so far as the aspect of regular bail is concerned. Rule is made absolute, accordingly.
DIRECT SERVICE is permitted.
5. Today, fervent submissions were made by learned advocate Mr.Popat for the applicant that further investigation is not as yet over. The applicant cannot be denied the regular bail. He has also urged that some of the conditions imposed by the Court are quite restrictive and they also hamper the chances of his perusing the business as also to carry on the social obligations , i.e. the daughter is of the marriageable age and he is unable to travel outside the State. He has Page 4 of 8 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 15 21:21:08 IST 2020 R/CR.MA/8632/2020 ORDER further requested earnestly that the CBI be put to certain conditions and conclude its further investigation, as it took this agency a long time to complete the same. He also raised certain fundamental questions of non applicability of circular which is the very basis for alleging against him and his brother.
6. Learned Special Public Prosecutor Mr. Kodekar for respondent No.1 has strongly objected to any restrictions to the function of further investigation. According to him, it is the prerogative of the Investigating agency. He also fairly submitted that there is no cause of complaint given by the present applicant while on interim bail, on any of the occasions, firstly for three months and then for four months and six months respectively. He has requested the Court not to allow the regular bail, but to permit the interim bail and also further requested minimum six months for the CBI to complete further investigation. However, he added that due to Pandemic on account of COVID-19, it cannot be stated with certainty whether in the given stipulated period, it will be feasible for the CBI to conclude the investigation. It is trying its level best, as there are many banks from which necessary documents are also to be obtained. He also urged that permission to travel every time should be under strict gaze of the Courts, if at all after Pandemic it is urged and no leniency be shown on that front.
7. Ms. M.D.Mehta, learned Additional Public Prosecutor Page 5 of 8 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 15 21:21:08 IST 2020 R/CR.MA/8632/2020 ORDER for respondent No.2 has supported the version of the learned Special Public Prosecutor Mr. Kodekar and has urged to continue the interim bail without grant of regular bail.
8. Noticing the detailed submissions made by both the sides and also the factum of there being no hindrance ever caused to the investigating agency and in absence of any complaint of misconduct or misuse of liberty on the part of the applicant, the Court deems it appropriate to further extend the period of interim bail for nine (09) months without giving any independent and separate reasons in the present application or without entering into the materials collected during further investigation so as not to prejudice the rights of either side. The reasons given at the time of grant of interim bail the first time shall be construed as reasons in the present application.
9. Being fully conscious that this arrangement of interim bail is made pending the further investigation and noticing the fact that CBI has been investigating further for a long time, a balance needs to be struck in a matter like the present one where there is a question of personal liberty vis a vis the need for a thorough probe into the alleged misuse of public money. It is though the prerogative of the investigating agency to continue the investigation, noticing the plethora of documents, which it has collected, and which requires to be probed into deeply, it cannot continue for eternity, therefore, when considerable time is Page 6 of 8 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 15 21:21:08 IST 2020 R/CR.MA/8632/2020 ORDER consumed, bearing in mind period of Pandemic, let the further investigation which is stated to be left out, be completed within a period of 09 (nine) months. Let all possible endeavours be made to complete further investigation by then, as this otherwise would further delay the trial, which also needs to start once further investigation gets concluded. Correspondingly, so far as the present application is concerned, applicant's period of interim bail is required to be extended for 09(nine) months from the last expiry date. On the applicability of circular which is the edifice of this Prosecution, let an appropriate time the same be gone into once the entire investigation is over so as to have the holistic view of the allegations and disputes.
10.All the terms and conditions which have been imposed while granting the interim bail lastly shall continue to govern the applicant except the following modifications :
(1) Marking presence before the CBI/ACB office, Gandhinagar in person by the applicant shall be once in two months. It shall be on 1st day of English Calendar month.
2. On the 1st and the 15th of every English Calendar Month, the officer from DCB(Crime), Vadodara shall visit the office of the ¡present applicant between 11:00 a.m. and 12:00 p.m. and through his mobile phone, he shall organise the video conferencing, on connecting to the office of CBI at Gandhinagar. His marking presence in person at the CBI office, will be once in two months Page 7 of 8 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 15 21:21:08 IST 2020 R/CR.MA/8632/2020 ORDER on the 1st day of English Calendar Month and the first such visit shall be on the 1st September,2020. In the event of his personal visit to the office of CBI, marking presence through VC would be only once on the 15 th day of English calendar month.
3. He shall confine himself to the State of Gujarat till further order. So far as relaxation of this condition of his movement outside the State of Gujarat is concerned, he is permitted to approach this Court, Once the effect of COVID-19 is receded. Any such application is moved, the same will be decided on the strength of the merit at that stage.
11. Application stands disposed of accordingly. Rule is made absolute to the above extent.
(MS. SONIA GOKANI, J. ) MISHRA AMIT V./sudhir Page 8 of 8 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 15 21:21:08 IST 2020