Gauhati High Court
Page No.# 1/ vs The Central Bureau Of Investigation on 6 November, 2025
Page No.# 1/11
GAHC010237202025
2025:GAU-AS:14971
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Bail Appln./3469/2025
BINOD KUMAR JAIN
S/O- LATE GULAB CHAND JAIN
R/O PARVATI APARTMENT, 99/1 NARKEL DANGA MAIN ROAD,
PHOOLBAGAN, KOLKATA, WEST BENGAL-700054.
VERSUS
THE CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION,
THROUGH THE STANDING COUNSEL, CENTRAL BUREAU OF
INVESTIGATION.
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. K N CHOUDHURY, U BHARADWAJ,MS. L WANGSA,MS A
DAS,MRS. R S DEURI,MR. T DEURI
Advocate for the Respondent : SC, CBI,
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA
ORDER
Date : 06-11-2025 Heard Mr. K. N. Choudhury, learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr. T. Deuri, learned counsel for the accused applicant and Ms. M. Kumari, learned Standing counsel for the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).
Page No.# 2/11
2. This is an application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the accused applicant in connection with RC-12(A)/2025- GWH arising out of FIR No.RC0172025A0012 registered in CBI, ACB P.S., Guwahati under Section 61 (2) of the BNSS, 2023 read with Section 7, 7A, 8, 9, 10 and 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
3. The facts as alleged in the FIR dated 14.10.2025 are, inter alia, that the informant who was identified as a source had lodged the FIR alleging that M/s. Mohan Lal Jain, a partnership firm having it's office in Kolkata, West Bengal was awarded with the contract of 4-laning of National Highway-37, between Demow to End of Moran Bypass, in the Dibrugarh District in the State of Assam on EPC mode, besides other contracts under PMU, Dibrugarh scheduled to be completed in July, 2024; that the firm could not complete the construction in timely manner and therefore, applied for grant of Extension of Time (for short, 'EoT') and issuance of Completion Certification for the said project; that Shri Binod Kumar Jain, the accused applicant, a representative of the aforesaid firm, informed the co-accused Shri Maisnam Riten Kumar Singh, ED & RO, NHIDCL, Guwahati (herein after referred to as "Co-accused") on 17.09.2025 that since his firm has already completed the Emergency Landing Facility (for short, 'ELF') in Dibrugarh and also submitted their request for grant of EOT as well as for issuance of the Completion Certificate, he wanted to meet the aforesaid Co-accused; that on 10.10.2025, the accused applicant conveyed to one Amit Jain, a partner of M/s Mohan Lal Jain that they were required to visit the aforesaid Co-accused at Guwahati either on 13.10.2025 or 14.10.2025; that the aforesaid Amit Jain conveyed the accused applicant that they would have to deliver a total amount of Page No.# 3/11 Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lacs only) as demanded by the aforesaid Co- accused; that the accused applicant conveyed to the aforesaid Amit Jain that he would be reaching Guwahati on 14.10.2025 to meet the Co- accused at his office; that there was every likelihood that the demanded bribe of Rs. 10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lacs) would be delivered by the accused applicant to the Co-accused on 14.10.2025 at NHIDCL, Regional Office, Guwahati for favourable issuance of EOT and the Completion Certificate.
4. On receipt of the FIR, the Officer-in-Charge, CBI, ACB, Guwahati registered the FIR on the same date as RC0172025A0012 under Section 61 (2) of BNS, 2023 read with Section 7/8/9/10/12 of the PC Act, 1988. The case No. RC0172025A0012 was renumbered as Case No. R- 12(A)/2025-GWH in the Court of learned Special Judge, CBI, Assam, Guwahati.
5. After receipt of the FIR, CBI prepared the Pre-Trap Memorandum (for short, 'PTM') on the same day i.e. 14.10.2025, wherein, name of particulars of 2 (two) independent witnesses as well as name of particulars of CBI officials were provided. The PTM reveals that one Shri Abhimanyu Kumar, PI and Trap Laying Officer (for short, 'TLO') led the CBI team for the trap. The PTM while detailing the factual background behind the trap, mentioned that there was every likelihood of a bribe of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lacs only) would be delivered by the accused applicant to the Co-accused on 14.10.2025 for favourable issuance of the EoT and the Completion Certificate. Accordingly, a plan was made to lay the trap to catch the accused persons, namely, Sri Maishram Riten Kumar Singh (Co-accused) and Shri Binod Kumar Jain (accused applicant) on the Page No.# 4/11 spot while demanding and accepting and handing over of the undue advantages respectively. After the alleged trap, the CBI team prepared the Memorandum of Recovery and Seizure on the same date, i.e., 14-10-2025 at about 10.30 AM onwards which revealed that the CBI team reached Bharalu View Apartment, Santipur, Guwahati at around 10.30 AM. From there, the team followed a Maruti Ertiga Car to the office of the NHIDCL, Guwahati situated at GNB Road, opposite AGP Office, Ambari, Guwahati. At around 10:40 AM, one of the two persons, who rode the aforesaid vehicle, got down of the Car and he proceeded towards the NHIDCL Office. It was stated that the source confirmed that the person who alighted from the above mentioned car was the accused applicant, Shri Binod Kumar Jain who entered the NHIDCL office to deliver the undue advantage amounting to Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lacs) to the Co- accused. It was stated that at around 11.35 AM, the source informed CBI that the accused applicant had delivered the undue advantage to the Co- accused. On receipt of the information, all the team members of CBI including the independent witnesses, rushed inside the office of the Co- accused and on reaching the office of the co-accused, it was alleged that the middle aged person who had alighted from the Car was seen coming out of the chamber. When the CBI team intercepted the accused applicant, the accused applicant introduced himself as Binod Kumar Jain and on being challenged that he had handed over the bribe amount to the Co-accused, he became perplexed and did not utter any word. The Memorandum also provided that on being asked about the delivery of illegal gratification amounting to Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lacs) to the Co-accused, the accused applicant confessed the same and begged for Page No.# 5/11 pardon and said that the said amount was lying in the chamber of the Co- accused. It was also mentioned that the accused applicant stated that the money was given to the Co-accused for issuance of the Completion Certificate and Extension of Time for the contract. Thereafter, the CBI team challenged the Co-accused and the Co-accused too became perplexed and begged for pardon and the Co-accused stated that he did not demand the amount from the accused applicant and the amount was given to him and he had just accepted the same. On search of the drawer of his office of the Co-accused, they recovered a black colour carry bag containing 20 bundles of G.C. notes of Rs.500/- each denomination totalling to Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lacs only) and the same was seized by the CBI team. It was mentioned that later on, the Co-accused admitted that he had taken the bribe in lieu of issuance of the Completion Certificate and the EoT to the accused applicant, Shri Binod Kumar Jain.
6. That the accused applicant has been arrested on 14.10.2025 and he is inside the jail for the last 23 days.
7. Mr. K.N. Choudhury, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the accused applicant submits that no case could be made out against the accused applicant from the facts and allegations made against the accused applicant of the case. He submits that there exists major material contradiction in the CBI story in the Memorandum of Recovery and Seizure dated 14.10.2025 and the grounds of arrest mentioned in Notices under Section 47 as well as 48 of BNSS. He submits that it is clearly stated in the Memorandum of Recovery and Seizure dated 14.10.2025 that the accused applicant was intercepted by the CBI team while he was coming out of the chamber, whereas in the grounds of arrest, it is stated that the accused Page No.# 6/11 applicant was caught red handed while giving the illegal gratification to the aforesaid Co-accused, Shri Maisnam Riten Kumar Singh. The learned Senior Counsel submits that the accused applicant is no way linked with the alleged recovery of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lacs only) from the drawer of the office chamber of the Co-accused, Shri Maisnam Riten Kumar Singh. He submits that there is no witness to the alleged incident of paying the money by the accused applicant to the aforesaid Co- accused. The learned Senior Counsel further submits that since there was a contract which was being executed by the partnership firm, represented by the accused applicant with the NHIDCL, the accused applicant may have visited the office of the NHIDCL but the same by no way imply or implicate the accused applicant of committing the offence as alleged by the CBI while arresting him. He submits that there is no witness that CBI could name who has seen bribing the aforesaid Co-accused by the accused applicant. Therefore, he submits that no case of bribing the Co- accused by the accused applicant could be prima facie made out against the accused applicant.
8. The learned Senior Counsel submits on the specific ground of medical issues for granting bail to the accused applicant. By referring to various medical documents and prescriptions submitted before this Court, the learned Senior Counsel submits that the accused applicant is at an advanced age of 66 years and has been suffering from 4 th stage of liver cirrhosis and he needs constant medication and medical attention from qualified liver specialists. He further submits that while he was behind the bar also, he required constant medical support; and the special medical support that is required is neither available in the jail nor the same is Page No.# 7/11 available in the Guwahati Medical College to a large extent.
9. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the accused applicant further submits that it has been more than 23 days that the accused applicant is in judicial custody and by this time, the CBI has already seized the most of the documentary evidences and other materials required for the purpose of investigation. He submits that the house of the accused applicant was also searched by the CBI and though nothing incriminating against the accused applicant was found, certain documents personal to the accused applicant have been recovered by the CBI.
10. In view of the aforesaid factual matrix and stressing on the aspect that the accused applicant is in urgent need of proper medical attention, the learned Senior Counsel submits and prays that the accused applicant should be released on bail with appropriate conditions as this Court may deem fit and proper.
11. Ms. M. Kumari, learned Standing Counsel, CBI submits that the accused applicant is involved in a bribery case involving a senior official from NHIDCL. She submits that the accused applicant was caught red handed by the CBI team while bribing the Co-accused, Shri Maisnam Riten Kumar Singh of Rs.10,00,000/ (Rupees Ten Lacs only). She further submits that the CBI team actually acted on certain specific information about the payment to be made to the Co-accused by the accused applicant and accordingly, the CBI team with proper pre-trap planning had executed the trap complying with all the requirements as prescribed under the law. She submits that the partnership firm of the accused applicant has been involved in bribing various high officials and on receipt of the information, the accused applicant was under surveillance of the CBI team Page No.# 8/11 for a while. She submits that both the accused persons have been caught red handed and arrested by the CBI officials in front of independent witnesses and since the investigation is still in a nascent stage, the accused applicant should not be granted the privilege of regular bail, at this stage.
12. While relying on the case of Serious Fraud Investigating Office- vs-Aditya Sarda; reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC 764, the learned Standing Counsel submits that the economic offences having deep routed conspiracies and involving huge loss of public funds need to be viewed seriously and consider as a grave offences affecting the economy of the country as a whole and thereby causing serious threat to the financial health of the country. Therefore, she submits that the Courts should not take lenient view regarding these organized crimes involving white collar crime while granting bail, which may give a wrong message to the society.
13. The learned Standing Counsel submits that whatever medical attention that may be required by the accused applicant could be provided in the jail itself as the jail is well equipped with all modern medical facilities and in an emergency, the accused applicant can always avail the facilities available in Guwahati Medical College.
14. In view of the aforesaid submissions, the learned Standing Counsel submits that this is not a fit case wherein the accused applicant should be granted bail, at this stage.
15. This Court has elaborately heard the submissions made by the respective counsel of the parties. This Court has also gone through the scanned copy of Case Diary submitted before this Court.
Page No.# 9/11
16. It is seen from the records that the accused applicant is a Manager working in the partnership firm, namely, M/s Mohan Lal Jain located in Kolkata which is involved in executing certain EPC contracts in Dibrugarh wherein NHIDCL is also a party representing the Government. It is also seen that the accused applicant was in fact arrested from the office of the NHIDCL located in Guwahati. However, as far as the versions of CBI in the Post Trap Memorandum i.e. Memorandum of Recovery and Seizure and the grounds of arrest of CBI provided in Notices under Section 47 & 48 of BNSS, there is a striking difference relating to the time of interception and arrest of the accused applicant by the CBI team. It is apparent on perusal of the aforesaid documents that though the CBI in their Grounds of Arrest mentioned that the accused applicant was caught red handed while bribing the Co-accused, namely, Maisnam Riten Kumar Singh, however, in the Post Trap Memorandum i.e. Memorandum of Recovery and Seizure dated 14.10.2025, it has been specifically mentioned that the accused applicant was apprehended while he was coming out of the chamber of the aforesaid Co-accused. Therefore, these two versions of the CBI do not say the same thing and therefore, it cannot be prima facie ascertained, at this stage, as to which version of the CBI story is correct. In case of trap relating to bribery, sequence of events is of utmost importance and there should not be any missing links relating to demand and acceptance of bribery. In the instant case, after perusal of the materials, this Court, prima facie, could not find any substantive material which reveals that the accused applicant was, in fact, found at the time of delivering the alleged amount of bribery to the Co-accused. However, this Court would like to refrain from going much into the details of the merit of the case at this Page No.# 10/11 stage except the materials to form a prima facie opinion for consideration of the bail.
17. It is seen from the medical documents submitted by the accused applicant that the accused applicant is suffering from a chronic health ailment which may aggravate if timely special medical attention is not given to the accused applicant.
18. Taking into account the whole factual matrix, materials available before this Court, including the materials in the Case Diary made available to this Court and also after hearing the submissions made by the respective counsel appearing for the parties, this Court is of the considered opinion that the accused applicant has been able to make out a prima facie case which merits interference by this Court. Therefore, this Court, taking the whole aspects in their entirety, is of the opinion that the accused applicant should be allowed to go on bail at this stage.
19. Accordingly, it is directed that the accused applicant, namely, Binod Kumar Jain shall be released forthwith on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupess One Lac) only, with 2 (two) local solvent sureties of like nature, one of which shall be a Government Servant, to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge, CBI, Assam, Guwahati subject to the following conditions:
(a) that the accused applicant shall surrender his passport to the learned Special Judge, CBI, Assam, Guwahati, if the same is not yet seized by the CBI or not surrendered before the Special Judge, CBI, Assam, Guwahati;
(b) that the accused applicant shall fully co-operate with the investigation of the instant case by CBI;
Page No.# 11/11
(c) that the accused applicant shall make himself available before the investigating CBI as and when called for by the CBI;
(d) that the accused applicant shall not try to tamper or hamper with the investigation of the CBI in the instant case, in whatsoever manner.
20. In view of the aforesaid directions, this instant bail application is disposed of as allowed.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant