Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

9. It is further stated that the manipulation was done by one of the user ID and bid IDs. For manipulating the tenders of MPJNM, a demo file was created on MP e-procurement portal. That file was created using ID PT 4, which was given to THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH (Nandkishore Bramhne Vs. State of M.P. through EOW) OSMO IT Solutions at the time of performance testing and they also used digital signature certificate (DSC) of Keshav Rao Uikey. The IP address registered while creating the said demo file was 27.60.163.98 and 27.60.185.14 which was linked with mobile No. 9755092919. The SIM of this mobile number was registered in the name of co-accused Varun Chaturvedi and was being used by co-accused Vinay Choudhary. Thereafter, hackers entered into the database through the staging server, where original tenders were stored and this process was done through virtual private network (VPN), the access of which was only with applicant Nandkishore Bramhe. After reaching the database server hackers accessed the file where the original tenders were saved. They copied the details of all the bidders, who submitted the bids, which were encrypted. After copying the bids they again came back to the demo tender file created by them earlier and by using bidder ID number 15597 and vendor ID number QK 829 846 pasted the said bids in demo file. The vendor ID used for this purpose was the same, which was issued to OSMO for performance testing in the year 2016. After pasting the encrypted bid in the demo file, the hackers assessed the system again on 03-03-2018 i.e. the date on which the said bids stood decrypted as the date of opening the demo tender was mentioned as 03-03-2018. Thus, they were able to see the figures/bids submitted by all the bidders in encrypted form. After seeing the amount filed by each bidder another demo file was created in the second demo file, the encrypted bids as visible in the first demo file were pasted in the second demo file. Again by using the bidder ID No.15597 having vendor ID number QK29846 they manipulated the bids and made the person they wanted to benefit as the lowest bidder. After making the change in the second demo Date: 2019.08.26 11:06:50 +05'30' THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH (Nandkishore Bramhne Vs. State of M.P. through EOW) file and placing a wrong bidder L1 hackers copied the encrypted/manipulated bid value and again by using the staging server reached the database server through a VPN, access of which was given to applicant Nandkishore Bramhe, opened the original tender file and pasted the said encrypted manipulated bid value next to the name of the bidder they wanted to benefit and thus manipulated the bids.

10. Learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the case. Although, earlier bail application of the applicant was rejected on merit by this court vide order dated 25/6/2019 passed in M.Cr.C.No.18310/2019, but at that time investigation was going on, so this Court rejected applicant's bail application observing that at this stage this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the applicant. Now, the investigation is over and charge-sheet has been filed so far as it relates to the applicant. It is further submitted that the applicant was posted in MPSEDC in the year 2012 and since then he had been working there. The duties/role of the applicant in MPSEDC were registration of different department on the e-Procurement portal and forward the complaints received in respect of the same to the appropriate authority. It is further submitted that on the e-procurement portal, any of the Government department can register itself by filing form available on the website and then concerning department can upload tenders on e-procurement portal. The applicant has no role in tender process. It is alleged that the hackers used the VPN access to manipulate the data of bids by using VPN allotted to the applicant, but there is no evidence on record to show that the hackers used the VPN allotted to the applicant with the knowledge of the applicant. The duty of the security of e-

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH (Nandkishore Bramhne Vs. State of M.P. through EOW) procurement portal was with Antares Systems Ltd. and TCS. Applicant was the first person who complained regarding manipulation in tenders. It is further submitted that the only allegation against the applicant is that he provided VPN Access to other co-accused persons who manipulated the bid and thereby applicant is a part of a conspiracy, but there is no clinching evidence on record to show that it is the applicant who provided VPN access to other co-accused persons. There is no evidence on record to show that the applicant anyway connected with other co-accused person who manipulated the bids. Even, EOW had also conducted a search of the residential premises of the present applicant, but nothing objectionable was seized from his house. No unaccountable property or tainted money was seized by the Police from the possession of the applicant. Similarly, no other incriminating document was seized by the police from the possession of the applicant. Applicant is a Government servant. There is no likelihood of him absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence. The Charge-sheet has been filed, applicant is in custody since 14/04/2019 and conclusion of trial will take time because the investigation regarding other co-accused persons is going on, so applicant be released on bail.

11. Learned counsel for the respondent/EOW opposed the prayer and submitted that from the evidence collected by EOW during investigation it is revealed that the applicant was known to co-accused Vinay Choudhary since 2007 when the applicant was working with NVDA. It was the applicant who pitched the OSMO Solutions in the year 2016 under the pretext of performance testing in the E-tendering process. The role of applicant was to make sure that no untoward incident takes place in the whole process of E-tendering. It was also his duty that THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH (Nandkishore Bramhne Vs. State of M.P. through EOW) there are no security lapses in the whole process of E-tendering. On the request of applicant Nandkishore Brahme, VPN Access was given to him. That VPN was used in the tender manipulation. There is apprehension of tempering with the evidence by applicant Mr. Nandkishore Brahme. He further submitted that two laptops and one pen drive were seized from the possession of the applicant and analysis of said seized material is going on and report is yet to come, so he should not be released on bail. In this regard he also placed reliance on Apex Court judgement passed in the case of State of U.P. through CBI Vs. Amarmani Tripathi, 2005 (8) SCC 21, State of Bihar Vs.Rajballav Prasad @ Rajballav Prasad Yadav, 2017 (2) SCC 178 and the judgement passed by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Sudhir Sharma Vs. State of M.P., passed in M.Cr.C.No.1258/2015 vide order dated 30/10/2015.