Allahabad High Court
George Kuruvilla vs State Of U.P. And Another on 19 December, 2023
Author: Raj Beer Singh
Bench: Raj Beer Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD Reserved Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:240694 Court No. - 78 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 39411 of 2023 Applicant :- George Kuruvilla Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Gaurav Pratap Singh,Gautam Baghel Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sanjay Kumar Yadav Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.
1. Heard Sri Kamal Krishna, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Gaurav Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Gyan Prakash, learned Dy. Solicitor General of India, assisted by Sri Sanjay Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the CBI and learned A. G. A. for the State.
2. This bail application has been filed moved on behalf of applicant-accused George Kuruvilla in F. I. R. dated 24.4.2023, bearing No. RC 216/2023/A0004, Police Station- CBI/AC-I, New Delhi, under Sections-7/8/9/10/12 of P. C. Act and Section-120-B IPC with prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail during trial.
3. According to prosecution version, an information was received by the Central Bureau of Investigation (hereinafter referred as CBI) that Sri Ramit Lala, General Manager, Broadcast Engineering Consultants India Limited, a Central Public Sector Enterprise of Government of India (hereinafter referred as BECIL) under Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, is indulging in corrupt practices in collusion with unknown officials by extending favours to private companies in tender process and expeditious payments of their pending bills in exchange of huge bribe money from the representatives of those private companies.
In that process information was developed that Ms Monica Dhawan, Managing Director of M/s Fusion Corporate Solution Private Limited, Gurgaon (hereinafter referred to the said 'FCSPL') along with her sister Charu Khanna (Business head) and father Mr J. M. P. Khanna also director of the said company, is pursuing various tenders of the different ministries and government departments floated by BECIL and for clearance of their pending bills for the already executed works awarded by the BECIL. As per information, Ms. Monica Dhawan approached Ramit Lala for favours in getting work orders. On 17.4.2023 Ramit Lala enquired from Ms. Monica Dhawan about pending bills of her company with BECIL and he asked her for a meeting. On 19.4.2023 Ramit Lala asked Ms. Charu Khanna to meet him in Delhi and later Ms. Charu Khanna informed Ramit Lala that money could not be arranged. On 24.4.2023 the CBI came to know that Ms. Charu Khanna has told her sister Monica Dhawan that Ramit Lala is pestering her for payment of amount and she is tired of making excuses and she asked her father to arrange the money and that one Vishnu, driver of Charu Khanna, was asked to deliver bribe amount to Ramit Lala at his office. On the basis of these facts, a regular case was registered by the CBI.
On receipt of said information that the driver Vishnu was likely to deliver the bribe amount to Ramit Lala at his office, a trap team, including two independent witnesses, was constituted and while the CBI team was on the way, the source informed that a packet containing bribe amount has been delivered by Vishnu Bahadur Bika to Ramit Lala near his office and thereafter the trap team was divided into two parts and one of the team apprehended Vishnu Bahadur Bika at Yamuna bridge near Akshardham temple, New Delhi, who disclosed that he has delivered a packet containing cash to Ramit Lala under instructions of Monica Dhawan. Meanwhile Ramit Lala was also located at the 'Weekend Wine and More' in Sector 101 NOIDA by second team. On disclosure of Ramit Lala, the said packet containing bribe amount of Rs. two lacs was recovered from the car of Nishant Malhotra (a friend of Shri Ramit Lala) and on the envelope word "Ramit Ji 8130190438" was found written. It was also alleged that one packet was recovered from the bag of Vishnu Bahadur Bika, which was containing cash to the tune of Rs. 3,00,000/- (Three lacs) and on the packet a hand written note "George" was found written on the packet.
Earlier the CBI has put suspected mobile numbers of accused persons namely Ramit Lala, Monica Dhawan, Charu Khanna and Vishnu Bahadur Bika on interception after due approval of competent authority and on the basis of conversation of the said phone calls and Whats-app messages, it was revealed that accused persons have talked about processing of expeditious payment or to schedule meeting places, demand of bribe by accused public servant and arrangement of same by accused private persons. Investigation also revealed that there was incriminating WhatsApp messages amongst the accused Monica Dhawan and Ramit Lala. It was also revealed that 'FCSPL' is one of the 19 empanelled agencies for social media work in BECIL and total number of 10 projects/work/event work were awarded to that company by BECIL. On 3.1.2023 total number of 38 invoices aggregating to Rs. 5.31 crores under 09 projects were outstanding in account of 'FCSPL' with BECIL, out of which 20 invoices aggregating to Rs. 3,73,38,709/- were processed and passed by BECIL for payment to the said company. Investigation has revealed a pattern showing that the invoices for above payments were forwarded by Sri Ramit Lala to George Kuruvilla after Ms. Monica Dhawan contacted them and pursued for release of payments, wherein hints of bribes were made and consequently payments were released after such calls. In the charge-sheet details of several telephonic calls amongst accused persons and WhatsApp chats have been referred and it was concluded that accused Ramit Lala and applicant-accused George Kuruvilla entered into a criminal conspiracy with co-accused Monica Dhawan, Charu Khanna and J. M. P. Khanna and Vishnu Bahadur, with the object to accept illegal gratification as reward for facilitating release of payments against bills / invoices submitted by the 'FCSPL' under various projects awarded by Government / Ministries. In pursuance to the said criminal conspiracy Ramit Lala and George Kuruvilla accepted or agreed to accept illegal gratifications from Monica Dhawan, Charu Khanna, J. M. P. Khanna and Vishnu Bahadur Bika and thereby Monica Dhawan, Charu Khanna, J. M. P. Khanna and Vishnu Bahadur Bika offered bribes and abetted the accused public servants to accept the same in lieu of releasing of payments to the said company.
4. Shri Kamal Krishna, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the applicant / accused submitted that the applicant-accused is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Applicant was working as Chairman / Managing Director of BECIL since April, 2016. Applicant is neither named in the first information report nor his name has figured in the source information developed by the C. B. I. There is absolutely no evidence that the applicant has made any demand for illegal gratification or accepted any illegal gratification or money. The demand of illegal gratification and acceptance has been shown on the part of accused Ramit Lala, who was working as General Manager. Learned counsel has referred case Neeraj Dutta V State (NCT of Delhi) 2022 0 Supreme (SC) 1248 and submitted that no case under Section 7 P. C. Act is made out.
5. It was submitted that as per prosecution version, one packet was recovered from the car the Vishnu Bahadur Bika and on said packet the name of applicant was found mentioned as 'George' but after arrest of accused persons when the C. B. I. filed application before the Court of Special Judge (CBI) for police custody remand of accused persons, there is absolutely no whisper regarding the fact that any packet containing the hand written word "George" was recovered from the vehicle of Vishnu Bahadur Bika and that the recovery memo of said packet is not on record. Further, as per the information allegedly received by the C. B. I., there was no such information that any packet containing Rs. three lacs has been given to co-accused Vishnu Bahadur Bika for delivery to the applicant-accused. In the first information report also there is no such version that any packet containing Rs. three lacs in the form of bribe has been sent for payment to the applicant. It was submitted that said version regarding recovery of packet from the car of co-accused Vishnu Bahadur Bika has been developed later on to implicate the applicant-accused falsely in this case. On 24.4.2023 the C. B. I. has conducted search at the residence of applicant but nothing incriminating was recovered from his residence. On 26.4.2023 applicant was produced before the Special Judge, Ghaziabad and the Court has granted police custody remand from 26.4.2023 till 02.05.2023 and thereafter the said remand was extended till 05.05.2023 but nothing incriminating was recovered from the applicant. Referring to the facts of the matter, it was submitted that there is no credible evidence against the applicant which could substantiate the charges against him. Even if the prosecution version is accepted that from car of Vishnu Bahadur Bika one packet containing an amount of Rs. three lacs was recovered and the said packet was having hand written note of 'George', the same would not make the applicant culpable in the crime in question, as there is no evidence that applicant has demanded or accepted any illegal gratification. There is no such CDR or WhatsApp chats that applicant has made any demand of money for release of payments / clearance of bills. It was submitted that the entire prosecution is based on 57 telephonic calls of accused persons but out of said 57 calls, there was not a single call which was made or received by the applicant. It was pointed out that as per prosecution version the mobile phone numbers of co-accused were intercepted but the name of the applicant does not figure there.
6. It is further submitted that one of the premises for the arrest of the applicant was that one of the co-accused had stated that she wanted to send a packet to applicant but the said incident was shown of 24.04.2023 when the applicant has joined his office after burial of his father-in-law. The charge sheet does not contain a single evidence against the applicant that he has cleared the bills of accused company by accepting illegal gratification. It is not the case of prosecution that the applicant has cleared any fake or bogus bill. Referring Section 17-A of P. C. Act, it was submitted that these provisions mandate that no police official shall conduct any enquiry or investigation into an offence alleged to have been committed by a public servant, where the alleged offence is relatable to any recommendation made or decision taken by such public servant in discharge of official functions or duties, without the previous approval of the Government, if the public servant is employed in connection with the affairs of the Union or State. The only exception to this rule is that no approval shall be necessary for cases involving arrest of a person on the spot on the charges of accepting or attempting to accept any undue advantage for himself for any other person. In the instant matter the applicant was neither arrested on the spot nor he accepted any undue advantage and nothing recovered from him and therefore section 17-A of the P. C. Act will be applicable in respect of applicant and thus, no enquiry or investigation could have been conducted against the applicant without approval of the competent authority. Further, as per procedure, the payments of bills were not entirely in the hands of the applicant as there was a procedure prescribed for clearance of bills. Referring to the procedure, the learned Senior counsel submitted that after finance and accounts section puts up a payment release note to the CMD for release of payment and after necessary entry in books of accounts and bills, the bills have to be cleared by the CMD on such recommendation. It is submitted that the applicant has been arrested merely on the basis of suspicion and there is no credible evidence against him and the prosecution is based on phone calls of co-accused persons and WhatsApp massages and there is no incriminating telephonic call on the part of the applicant -accused.
7. It is further submitted that charge-sheet has been submitted on 22.06.2023 against the applicant without obtaining the sanction for prosecution of the applicant. Learned Special Judge CBI, Ghaziabad upon receipt of the charge-sheet did not take cognizance and case was adjourned to 26.6.2023 for consideration and hearing on the issue of taking cognizance but sanction for prosecution was not produced and since then the case is adjourned again and again but the court has not taken cognizance, as the sanction for prosecution has not been produced by the CBI. Learned senior advocate submitted that in fact the CBI has submitted the charge-sheet without obtaining sanction for prosecution in order to defeat the right of applicant of getting default bail under section 167(2) CrPC. In this connection has referred recent pronouncement of Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Ritu Chhabariya V U.O.I. [W.P (criminal) No. 60/2023], decided on 26.4.2023 and submitted that on this ground alone applicant accused is entitled to be released on bail. It is further submitted that applicant is in jail since 25.04.2023 and thus, he has already under gone the detention of more than seven months and investigation is already in complete and charge-sheet has been submitted and that the accused is being detained in jail without trial, as the cognizance cannot be taken due absence of sanction for prosecution.
8. Per contra learned Dy. S. G. I. along with Sri Sanjay Yadav, learned counsel for the C. B. I. has opposed the bail application. It was submitted that the co-accused Charu Khanna, J. M. P. Khanna and Monica Dhawan were pursuing for release of payments from BECIL to their company and in that connection co-accused Vishnu Bahadur Bika, driver of co-accused Monica Dhawan and Charu Khanna, was given two packets, one containing Rs. two lacs and another Rs. three lacs. Co-accused Vishnu Bahadur Bika has delivered the packet containing Rs. two lacs to co-accused Ramit Lala, who was intercepted by C. B. I. team at the 'Weekend Wine and More' in Sector 101 NOIDA' and on his disclosure, the said packet containing bribe amount of Rs. two lacs was recovered from the car of Nishant Malhotra (a friend of Shri Ramit Lala) and on the packet word "Ramit Ji 8130190438" was found written. It was submitted that one packet was recovered from the car of Vishnu Bahadur Bika, which was containing cash to the tune of Rs. 3,00,000/- (Three lacs) and on the packet a hand written note "George" was found written on the packet and it was sent for delivery to applicant-accused. The contention that this recovery was introduced later with intention to implicate the applicant-accused, is wholly false and in fact said recovery has been shown in the recovery memo. From recording of the mobile phone calls of co-accused persons and the WhatsApp messages, it was revealed that accused persons have talked about processing of expeditious payment or to schedule meeting places, demand of bribe by accused public servant and arrangement of same by accused private persons. Investigation also revealed incriminating WhatsApp messages amongst the accused Monica Dhawan and Ramit Lala as well as applicant-accused. It was submitted that out of 38 invoices aggregating to Rs. 5.31 Crores under 09 projects, 20 invoices aggregating to Rs. 3,73,38,709/- were processed and passed by BECIL for payment to the said company and a pattern of payment shows that the invoices for above payments were forwarded by co-accused Sri Ramit Lala to applicant George Kuruvilla after Ms. Monica Dhawan contacted them and pursued for release of payments, wherein hints of bribes were made and consequently payments were released. It was submitted that co-accused Ramit Lala and applicant George Kuruvilla entered into a criminal conspiracy with Monica Dhawan, Charu Khanna and J. M. P. Khanna and Vishnu Bahadur with the object to accept illegal gratification as reward for facilitating release of payments against bills / invoices submitted by the 'FCSPL' under various projects awarded by Government / Ministries. In pursuance to the said criminal conspiracy Ramit Lala and George Kuruvilla accepted / agreed to accept illegal gratifications from co-accused Monica Dhawan, Charu Khanna, J. M. P. Khanna and Vishnu Bahadur Bika. The investigation revealed that the applicant has dealt with various contracts tenders which were awarded to and executed by FCSPL, which was being operated by Monica Dhawan, Charu Khanna and J. M. P. Khanna and pattern of the payments made to said company FCSPL shows that payments were released to the company wherein, hints of bribe were made. It is further submitted that WhatsApp messages clearly indicate that the applicant / accused being a public servant was indulging in corrupt practices and he was clearing payment to FCSPL in lieu of illegal gratifications.
9. It was further submitted that the contention raised on behalf of the applicant / accused that the charge-sheet was incomplete, as no sanction for prosecution of the applicant was obtained, is not acceptable. In this connection, learned Dy. Solicitor General has referred the case of Suresh Kumar Bhikamchand Jain Vs State of Maharashtra and others and another case Serious Fraud Investigation Office Versus Rahul Modi MANU/SC/0156/2022 and submitted that merely because sanction has not been obtained to prosecute the accused and to proceed to the stage of Section 309 Cr. P. C., it cannot be said that the charge-sheet was incomplete or that the accused is entitled to grant of statutory bail. Learned Dy. Solicitor General has referred the case of Neeraj Dutta Vs State (Govt. of N. C. T. of Delhi) AIR 2023 S C 330 and submitted that sincere efforts must be made so that the corrupt public servants are brought to book and convicted. The Case of A. B. Bhaskara Rao Vs C. B. I. (2011) 10 SCC 259 was also referred and it was submitted that in view of serious allegations, the applicant is not entitled for bail.
10. I have considered the rival submissions and perused the record.
11. Perusal of record shows that the applicant / accused is not named in the first information report, which was lodged against co-accused Ramit Lala, General Manager, BECIL and co-accused Monica Dhawan, Charu Khanna, J. M. P. Khanna and Vishnu Bahadur Bika, M/s Fusion Corporate Solutions Pvt. Ltd. and unknown persons. In this matter no one has made any complaint to CBI and essentially the prosecution case is based on the version of mobile phone call details and Whats-app messages. As per prosecution version, the calls of five mobile phones belonging to co-accused Monica Dhawan, Charu Khanna, J. M. P. Khanna, Vishnu Bahadur Bika and Ramit Lala were intercepted but it is not the case of the prosecution that calls of applicant / accused were intercepted. There is no direct evidence that applicant / accused has made demand of any illegal gratification from the co-accused persons or any amount was paid to him. In this connection, learned counsel for applicant has referred case of Neeraj Dutta Versus State (supra). As per prosecution, the C. B. I. was having information that co-accused Vishnu Bahadur Bika is going to deliver bribe amount of Rs. two lacs to co-accused Ramit Lala but the C. B. I. did not apprehend them while alleged amount was delivered to co-accused Ramit Lala. In the first information report, there is no such version that co-accused persons have sent the packet of alleged amount of Rs. 3,00,000/- for applicant / accused, rather it was mentioned that bribe amount of Rs. two lacs was being sent for co-accused Ramit Lala through driver Vishnu Bahadur Bika. It was pointed out that while moving an application before the trial court for getting the police custody remand of accused persons, there was no such version that any packet / envelop containing Rs. 3,00,000/- has been found in the car of co-accused Vishnu Bahadur Bika. It was also pointed out that in mobile phone of applicant-accused no incriminating message has been found, however, as per prosecution version, the applicant deleted the messages. There is no such specific allegation that any false or bogus bill was cleared by the applicant for payment to the accused company or that the procedure prescribed for payment was bypassed or changed for payments to the accused company for the execution of contract work. The applicant / accused was arrested on 24.4.2023 and his residential premises were searched but no incriminating article or amount has been recovered. After investigation, the charge-sheet has been submitted before the trial Court on 22.6.2023 but no sanction for prosecution of applicant / accused was filed and since then the case is being adjourned again and again, as no sanction for prosecution of accused / applicant has been filed by the CBI so far and thus even the cognizance has not been taken so far, whereas, the applicant / accused is in custody since 25.4.2023. In this connection, it was contended that after filing of charge-sheet judicial remand cannot be extended under Section 167 Cr. P. C. and that the provisions of Section 309 (2) Cr. P. C. apply after cognizance is taken. It was submitted on behalf of the applicant that the charge-sheet has been submitted in order to defeat the right of applicant / accused of getting default bail and in this connection, case of Ritu Chhabariya Vs Union of India (supra) was referred. Case of Sanjay Chandra Versus C. B. I. (2012) 1 SCC 40 was also referred. It was also pointed out that in similar circumstances the co-ordinate Bench of this Court has granted bail in Alok Mishra Vs State of U. P. through CBI AC-III New Delhi in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 9949 of 2022 Lucknow Bench. The applicant is in jail since 25.4.2023 and that cognizance has not been taken so far for want of sanction for prosecution.
12. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and above referred facts and specific role of applicant / accused, a case for grant of bail to the applicant is made out. Hence bail application is allowed.
13. Let the applicant George Kuruvilla, involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned subject to the following conditions:
i. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during trial.
ii. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses.
iii. If the applicant holds passport, the same be surrendered before the trial Court and he would not leave India without permission of trial Court. iv. The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted. v. The applicant will not try to contact, threat or otherwise influence the complainant or any of the witness of the case.
14. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court concerned shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of applicant, in accordance with law.
Order Date:- 19.12.2023 HR