Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

6. Mr.   Amin,   learned   Public   Prosecutor   submitted  that the appointment of data operators at various  check­posts   situated   on   the   border   town   of   the  Gujarat was initiated for the first time in the  HC-NIC Page 7 of 25 Created On Sun May 01 04:07:47 IST 2016 R/CR.MA/6763/2016 ORDER year   2011   by   the   State   Government.     Mr.   Amin  further   submitted   that   GIPL,   a   Government  company, was entrusted with the said work by the  Government   and   GIPL   in   its   turn   requisitioned  services   of   company   known   as   Phoenix,   which   is  run   by   the   wife   and   son   of   one   Mr.   Ashok  N.Chajjad,   who   was   internal   auditor   of   GIPL.  Mr.Amin   submitted   that   Ashok   N.   Chajjad   is  arrested   on   24.03.2016   in   connection   with   the  present offence.  Mr. Amin also pointed out that  GIPL had given contract to Phoenix only because  the   same   was   run   by   the   wife   and   son   of   Mr.  Chajjad.     Mr.   Amin,   on   the   basis   of   the  investigating   papers,   further   submitted   that  thereafter, services of another company known as  AARVI Encon Pvt. Ltd. was called for by GIPL for  recruitment   of   data   operators.     However,   the  earlier   data   operators   who   were   appointed   by  Phoenix   were continued.   Mr. Amin also further  submitted   that   one   Mr.V.K.   Sharma,   CEO   of   the  said company has been arrested on 24.03.2016 in  connection   with   the   present   offence.     Mr.   Amin  further   submitted   that   another   person   who   is  working   with   GIPL   as   Project   Officer,   one   Shri  Ramjibhai   Chavda   is   to   be   arrested,   but   is   not  available.

10.Mr.Amin submitted that the investigation is at a  very   crucial   stage   and   on   26.04.2016,   the  internal auditor Mr. Chajjad as well as Mr.V.K.  Sharma,   CEO   of   GIPL   are   already   arrested   and  therefore, custodial interrogation of the present  applicant is also necessary.  

11.Mr. Amin reiterated that parameters of grant of  anticipatory   bail   and   regular   bail   are   quite  different and therefore, parity would not come to  the   aid   of   the   applicant   and   should   not   be  considered by this Court.

(viii)   and   (xii)   as   well   as   the   explanation,  provisions of Prevention of Corruption Act would  be   attracted   and   the   data   operators   would   be  included in the definition of public servants as  they   perform   public   duty   and   they   receive   the  salary from the State.

15.Mr.Amin submitted that the present application is  under   section   438   of   the   Code   for   anticipatory  bail by a person against whom warrant is issued,  wherein,   recently,   CEO   of   the   said   Company   as  well as internal auditor have been arrested.  It  was also contended that even assuming against the  case   of   the   prosecution,   only   because   the   co­ accused have been enlarged on regular bail, the  offence is not washed out at this stage, i.e., at  the   stage   of   consideration   of   prayer   for  anticipatory bail.

28.In facts of this case, as observed hereinabove,  the role attributed to the applicant and gravity  of the offence requires custodial interrogation.  The facts reveal that the same is a large scale  well­planned racket, which has caused loss to the  public exchequer.  As noted hereinabove, the lead  which   the   investigating   agency   has   derived  because   of   custodial   interrogation   of   other  HC-NIC Page 23 of 25 Created On Sun May 01 04:07:47 IST 2016 R/CR.MA/6763/2016 ORDER accused has unearthed role of internal auditor as  well as CEO of the said company.  Therefore, even  the   contention   raised   that   the   FIR   is   lodged  against   the   persons   who   are   not   Government  servants also deserves to be negatived.