Applicants are not entitled for bail for offences under Sections 11, 13

1

AFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

Misc. Criminal Case No.3094 of 2015

Sudhir Kumar Bhole, S/o Late Prakash Bhole, aged about 40 years, Permanent R/o Kalapada, Vikas Nagar, Baitul (M.P.), Presently Residing at Sr. MIG-316, Vijeta Complex, New Rajendra Nagar, Raipur (C.G.)

---- Applicant

Versus

State of Chhattisgarh, Through P.S. State Economic Offence Investigation Bureau, District Raipur (C.G.)

---- Non-applicant


Satish Kumar Kaiwarth, S/o Late D. Mayaram Kaiwarth, aged about 48 years, Posted as Junior Technical Assistant, Nagrik Aapurti Nigam, Jagdalpur, R/o New Shanti Nagar, Near Durga Mandir, Raipur (C.G.)

---- Applicant

Versus

State of Chhattisgarh, Through P.S. State Economic Offence Investigation Bureau, District Raipur (C.G.)

---- Non-applicant


Motilal Sahu, aged about 58 years, S/o Late Manbodh Prasad Sahu, Pattakoti Godown, Gariaband, District Manager, Nagarik Aapurti Nigam, Gariaband, Revenue

Page 1 of 23

2

District Gariaband, Civil District Raipur (C.G.), R/o Quarter No.13, Section-2, Dindayal Upadhyay Nagar, Raipur

---- Applicant

Versus

The State of Chhattisgarh, Through State Bureau of Investigation Economic Offences / Anti Corruption Bureau, Raipur (C.G.)

---- Non-applicant


Dilip Kumar Sharma, 55 Yrs., S/o Late Shiv Dayal Sharma, Branch Manager, State Ware Housing Corporation, Balod, R/o Raj Bhandar Griha Nigam Parisar, Ganjpara, Balod

---- Applicant

Versus

State of Chhattisgarh, Through Rajya Aarthik Apraadh Anveshan Bureau, Distt. Raipur

---- Non-applicant

AND


Kaushal Kishore Yadu, S/o Late Shri M.L. Yadu, aged about 52 years, R/o Dahama Sadan, Behind Shanti Niketan School, Punjabi Colony, Dayalband, Bilaspur, Tahsil & District Bilaspur (CG)

---- Applicant

Versus

Page 2 of 23

3

State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Station House Officer, State Economic Investigation Bureau (ACB), Raipur, Distt. Raipur (CG)

---- Non-applicant

For Applicants in M.Cr.C.Nos.3094/2015 & 3098/2015:Mr. Maneesh Sharma, Advocate.

For Applicant in M.Cr.C.No.3209/2015: Mr. Y.C. Sharma, Advocate.

For Applicant in M.Cr.C.No.3102/2015: Mr. Raja Sharma, Advocate.

For Applicant in M.Cr.C.No.3185/2015: Mr. B.D. Guru, Advocate.

For Non-applicant/State: Mr. A.S. Kachhawaha, Additional Advocate General with Mr. Anupam Dubey, Deputy Govt. Advocate.

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal

CAV Order

16 /07/2015

1. Since all the above applications have arisen out of

the same crime number, therefore they are being disposed

of by this common order.

2. The accused/applicants have moved these bail

applications under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal

Page 3 of 23

4

Procedure, 1973 for releasing them on regular bail during

trial in connection with Crime No.9/2015 (Special Case

No.794/2015) pending in the Court of Special Judge under

the Prevention of Corruption Act, Raipur, registered at

Police Station Anti Corruption Bureau, Raipur for the

offence punishable under Sections 11, 13 (1) (d), 13 (2) of

the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act');

109, 120B, 409 and 420 of the IPC.

M.Cr.C.No.3094/2015

3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the applicant

namely Sudhir Kumar Bhole while working as Assistant

Accounts Officer in the Office of the Chhattisgarh State

Civil Supplies Corporation as on 4-5-2012 entered into

criminal conspiracy with other co-accused persons and

accepted sub-standard rice from rice millers and in lieu

thereof, obtained illegal gratification per quintal from rice

millers and thereafter, sent 4/- per quintal to other co-

accused, Head Quarter at Raipur, and thereby committed

the offences.

Page 4 of 23

5

M.Cr.C.No.3098/2015

4. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that applicant

Satish Kumar Kaiwarth while working as Junior Technical

Assistant in the Office of the Chhattisgarh State Civil

Supplies Corporation as on 10-1-2014 entered into

criminal conspiracy with other co-accused persons and

accepted sub-standard rice from rice millers and obtained

illegal gratification and thereby committed the offences.

M.Cr.C.No.3209/2015


Motilal Sahu while posted as District Manager in the Office

of the Chhattisgarh State Civil Supplies Corporation at

Gariyaband accepted sub-standard rice from rice millers

and obtained illegal gratification from rice millers and sent

a part of it to the Head Quarter at Raipur to other co-

accused persons, and thereby committed the offences.

M.Cr.C.No.3102/2015


Dilip Kumar Sharma while working as Branch Manager in

the State Ware Housing Corporation, Balod accepted sub-

Page 5 of 23

6

standard rice from rice millers during collection of rice in

the Nagarik Aapurti Nigam, Balod, and sent a part of it to

the Head Quarter at Raipur to other co-accused persons,

and thereby committed the offences.

M.Cr.C.No.3185/2015


Kaushal Kishore Yadu while posted as District Manager in

the Chhattisgarh State Civil Supplies Corporation, Bilaspur

with effect from 22-9-2012 accepted sub-standard rice and

obtained illegal gratification from rice millers and sent a

part of it i.e. 4/- per quintal to the Head Quarter at

Raipur to other co-accused, and thereby committed the

offences.

8. Mr. Maneesh Sharma, learned counsel appearing for

applicants Sudhir Kumar Bhole & Satish Kumar Kaiwarth,

would submit that the present applicants have not

committed any offence and they have been falsely

implicated. An amount of Rs.7,25,000/- has been

recovered from the Office of applicant Sudhir Kumar Bhole

for which offence under Section 13 (1) (e) of the Act has

Page 6 of 23

7

been separately registered against him in which he is

answerable and possession of that amount has properly

been explained by him before the competent authority by

submitting explanation. Mr. Maneesh Sharma, learned

counsel would further submit that applicant Sudhir Kumar

Bhole has been implicated on the basis of statement of co-

accused Arvind Dhruv which is not admissible as he is also

a co-accused in this case. Interception of telephonic

conversation has not been permitted by the competent

authority and there is no complaint of rice millers against

him. Applicant Sudhir Kumar Bhole is in custody since 20-

3-2015; charge sheet has already been filed and no

custodial interrogation of the applicant is required and

therefore, he be released on bail.

9. Mr. Maneesh Sharma, learned counsel, would also

submit that applicant Satish Kumar Kaiwarth was posted

as Junior Technical Assistant in the Office of the

Chhattisgarh State Civil Supplies Corporation at Jagdalpur

and he has performed his duty in accordance with law. An

amount of Rs.1,50,000/- has been recovered from the

possession of applicant Satish Kumar Kaiwarth for which Page 7 of 23

8

offence under Section 13 (1) (e) of the Act has also been

registered against him separately. Twin statement made

and available against the present accused is the

statements of Girish Sharma and Arvind Dhruv which are

not admissible in evidence and he is in custody since 20-3-

2015, charge sheet has already been filed and no

custodial interrogation of the applicant is required and

therefore, he be released on bail.

10. Mr. Y.C. Sharma, learned counsel for applicant

Motilal Sahu, would submit that the present applicant was

working as District Manager in the Office of the

Chhattisgarh State Civil Supplies Corporation, Gariyaband,

no seizure has been made against the applicant and there

are general and omnibus statements against him, he not

only surrendered before the Court, but also he has fully

cooperated with the investigation and charge-sheet has

already been filed and he is in custody since 15-6-2015.

No custodial interrogation of the applicant is required and

no useful purpose would be served by detaining him in jail,

therefore he be released on bail.

Page 8 of 23

9

11. Mr. Raja Sharma, learned counsel for applicant Dilip

Kumar Sharma, would submit that the present applicant is

not the officer working in the Office of the Chhattisgarh

State Civil Supplies Corporation, but he is the officer of the

Chhattisgarh State Ware Housing Corporation, he has

performed his duty in accordance with the Act applicable to

the applicant and an amount of 22,96,150/- has been

recovered from his possession, for which offence under

Section 13 (1) (e) of the Act has been registered against

him separately. Mr. Raja Sharma, learned counsel, would

further submit that since the applicant is detained in jail, he

could not file reply and immediately after release he will

explain the possession of alleged amount. He would also

submit that 80,720/- has been recovered from the

house of the applicant and 3,88,750/- has been seized

from his locker which he would explain satisfactorily upon

release. There is neither any allegation of demand nor any

complaint of acceptance of illegal gratification by applicant,

therefore, registration and arrest of the present applicant

for the instant offences are illegal and unauthorized and

Page 9 of 23

10

the applicant deserves to be released on bail, as he is in

jail since 20-3-2015 and in view of filing of charge-sheet,

no custodial interrogation of the applicant is required. No

witness has uttered any adverse statement against the

present applicant. Therefore, he be released on bail.

12. Mr. B.D. Guru, learned counsel for applicant Kaushal

Kishore Yadu, would submit that the present applicant has

not committed any offence and he has been falsely

implicated. Mr. Guru, learned counsel, would further

submit that Rs.23,35,000/- is alleged to have been

recovered from the locker of the present applicant, but in

fact, Rs.12,35,000/- has been seized from the locker of his

mother Smt. Shyama Yadu and Rs.11,00,000/- has been

recovered from the locker of his brother-in-law Satyajit

Yadu, therefore, those recovery cannot be held to be the

amount belonging to the applicant. He would further

submit that separate case under Section 13 (1) (e) of the

Act, 1988 has already been registered against him. Mr.

Guru, learned counsel, would also submit that statements

of four rice millers namely Lalit Agrawal, Raj Kumar

Agrawal, Manish Khediya and Sanjay Bindal have been Page 10 of 23

11

recorded and they have not alleged that they have paid

any amount to any of the officers including the present

applicant for accepting the alleged sub-standard rice. Mr.

Guru, learned counsel, would also submit that as per the

Government of India's circular, 30% of broken rice is

permissible to be accepted while delivering rice and

considering the quality of rice it has been accepted by the

applicant, as such it cannot be held that the applicant is

guilty of the offence and, he would also submit that the

transcription report is not admissible in evidence as well as

the statements of co-accused namely Girish Sharma and

Arvind Dhruv are also not admissible in evidence. The

accused is in detention from 20-3-2015. Further custodial

interrogation of the accused is not required and therefore,

the applicant be released on bail.

13. Replying to the aforesaid bail applications filed by the

applicants, Mr. A.S. Kachhawaha, learned Additional

Advocate General appearing on behalf of the State, would

submit that the applicants who are five in numbers along

with 13 other co-accused persons entered into criminal

conspiracy and the present applicants while working as Page 11 of 23

12

Officers in the Nagarik Aapurti Nigam / State Ware

Housing Corporation accepted sub-standard rice from rice

millers which included more broken rice which is required

to be taken by the order of Nagarik Aapurti Nigam and

accepted per quintal gratification from rice millers, and part

of the said gratification was retained by them and a part of

that amount was sent to the Head Quarter of Nagarik

Aapurti Nigam to other co-accused persons and as such,

huge unexplained amount has been recovered from each

of co-accused persons for which offences under Section

13 (1) (e) of the Act of 1988 has been registered against

them for possessing disproportionate property to their

known source of income. Mr. A.S. Kachhawaha, learned

Additional Advocate General, would further submit that

telephonic conversation of co-accused persons were

intercepted with the permission of competent authority duly

granted on 22-1-2015 and 10-2-2015 and on other

different dates. He would also submit that rice accepted

by accused persons was tested by the duly recognized

analysts of the Food Corporation of India and the technical

experts of the Chhattisgarh Nagarik Aapurti Nigam in Page 12 of 23

13

which rice accepted by the accused persons were found

sub-standard. Statements of rice millers and transporters

recorded clearly indicate that huge illegal gratification was

accepted by the accused persons in lieu of accepting sub-

standard rice and the said amount was distributed

amongst the present applicants and other co-accused

persons. He would submit following reply in particular

against each of the accused persons: -

1. Applicant Sudhir Kumar Bhole : Rs.7,25,000/- has

been recovered from the possession of the applicant.

Transcription report Ex.D-426 indicates the

conversation between the applicant and other

accused Shiv Shankar which elaborates involvement

of the present applicant.

2. Applicant Satish Kumar Kaiwarth : Rs.1,50,000/- has

been recovered from the possession of the applicant

and offence under Section 13 (1)(e) of the Act has

been registered against him separately. Report of

the handwriting expert Ex.D-91 has been received

against the present applicant which demonstrates the

Page 13 of 23

14

acceptance of money and also indicates the list of

rice millers from whom money has been recovered,

which tallies the handwriting expert report.

3. Applicant Motilal Sahu : Report of the handwriting

expert Ex.D-87 demonstrates the involvement of the

present applicant.

4. Applicant Dilip Kumar Sharma : Rs.22,96,150/- has

been recovered from the possession of the applicant,

Rs.80,720/- has been recovered from house and

Rs.3,88,750/- has been recovered from his locker.

Call details reports are available against the applicant

which show involvement of the present applicant in

the crime in question.

5. Applicant Kaushal Kishore Yadu : Rs.1,63,500/- has

been recovered from the house of the applicant and

Rs.23,35,000/- has been recovered from locker, and

there is no proper explanation of the said amount.

Quality test report of rice prepared by the FCI is

available implicating him in the offence charged.

Page 14 of 23

15

14. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and also

perused the case diary and available papers with utmost

circumspection.

15. A close and careful perusal of the material available

in the case diary of Crime No.9/2015 would show that

offence under Sections 420, 409, 109, 120-B IPC and

Sections 13(1)(d), 13(2), 11 of the Prevention of Corruption

Act have been registered against the present applicants/

accused persons, along with other thirteen accused

persons. It is the case of the prosecution that Chhattisgarh

Civil Services Corporation constituted by State

Government, collected paddy in the year 2014-15 and after

getting it custom milled from the rice millers, the rice is

deposited in the rice collection centre with the quality

prescribed by competent authority. It is further case of

prosecution that present applicants conspired with other

co-accused persons and accepted sub-standard rice in

violation of standard quality prescribed by competent

authority and obtained huge illegal gratification from the

rice millers to clear their sub-standard rice. It is also the

case of prosecution that the District Managers of the said Page 15 of 23

16

Corporation of the State collected illegal gratification eight

rupees per quintal and distributed the said illegal

gratification amongst the accused persons and thereby

cheated and caused huge loss to the State Government

by their corrupt and illegal means, which is apparent from

the fact that huge unexplained amount in total i.e.

Rs.3,43,96,965.00 was recovered from possession of

accused persons in their office as well as in their residence

on raid conducted on 12-2-2005 and thereby committed

the offences.

16. In the matter of State of Gujarat v. Mohanlal

Jitamalji Porwal 1 , their Lordships of the Supreme Court

while considering a request of the prosecution for adducing

evidence inter alia, observed as under:-

“5. ……..The entire community is aggrieved if the economic offenders who ruin the economy of the State are not brought to book. A murder may be committed in the heat of moment upon passions being aroused. An economic offence is committed with cool calculation and deliberate design with an eye on personal profit regardless of the conse-quence to the community. A disregard for the in-terest of the community can be manifested only at the cost of forfeiting the trust and faith of the com-munity in the system to administer justice in an

1 (1987) 2 SCC 364Page 16 of 23

17

even-handed manner without fear of criticism from the quarters which view white collar crimes with a permissive eye unmindful of the damage done to the national economy and national interest……..”

17. In State of Maharashtra through CBI, Anti

Corruption Branch, Mumbai v. Balakrishna Dattatrya

Kumbhar 2 , their Lordships of the Supreme Court have

held that corruption is violation of human right and

observed as under:-

“Corruption is not only a punishable offence but also undermines human rights, indirectly violating them, and systematic corruption, is a human rights’ violation in itself, as it leads to systematic economic crimes.”

18. Further, in the matter of Nimmagadda Prasad v.

Central Bureau of Investigation 3 , their Lordships of the

Supreme Court have held that economic offence is a grave

offence affecting the economy of the country as a whole

and observed as under:-

“23. Unfortunately, in the last few years, the coun-try has been seeing an alarming rise in white-col-lar crimes, which has affected the fibre of the country’s economic structure. Incontrovertibly, economic offences have serious repercussions on the development of the country as a whole.

2 (2012) 12 SCC 3843 (2013) 7 SCC 466

Page 17 of 23

18

25. Economic offences constitute a class apart and need to be visited with a different approach in the matter of bail. The economic offence having deep-rooted conspiracies and involving huge loss of public funds needs to be viewed seriously and considered as a grave offence affecting the econ-omy of the country as a whole and thereby posing serious threat to the financial health of the coun-try.”

19. Very recently, in the matter of Subramanian Swamy

v. Central Bureau of Investigation 4 , the Supreme Court

(Constitution Bench) while declaring Section 6-A of the

Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946

unconstitutional, observed as under:-

“Corruption is an enemy of nation and tracking down corrupt public servants and punishing such persons is a necessary mandate of the PC Act, 1988. It is difficult to justify the classification which has been made in Section 6-A because the goal of law in the PC Act, 1988 is to meet corruption cases with a very strong hand and all public ser-vants are warned through such a legislative mea-sure that corrupt public servants have to face very serious consequence.”“Corruption is any enemy of nation and tracking down corrupt public servant, howsoever high he may be, and punishing such person is a necessary mandate under the PC Act, 1988. The status or position of public servant does not qualify such public servant from exemption from equal treat-ment. The decision making power does not segre-gate corruption officers into two classes as they are common crimedoers and have to be tracked

4 (2014) 8 SCC 682Page 18 of 23

19

down by the same process of inquiry and investi-gation.”

20. Thus taking into consideration the facts and

circumstances of the case, noticed hereinabove and taking

into account, the nature and gravity of the offences, the

role of the applicants herein, the manner in which the

present applicants are alleged to have conspired with other

co-accused persons and thereby the sub-standard rice

were accepted by them contrary to the standard

specification prescribed by competent authority, which is

apparent from the quality test report conducted and

submitted by the Food Corporation of India and the

technical expert of the Corporation and the manner in

which co-accused persons have conspired with each other

and obtained huge illegal gratification from the rice millers

which is limpid from the statement of the rice millers

recorded by the prosecution and available in the case and

further taking note of the fact in total Rs.3,43,96,965.00

(Rupees Three Crore Forty Three Lacs Ninety Six

Thousand Nine Hundred and Sixty Five) was recovered

from the possession of accused persons from their office

Page 19 of 23

20

and their houses on raid conducted by Anti Corruption

Bureau on 12-2-2015. Not only this huge unexplained

money, valuable articles and the disproportionate wealth to

their known source of income have been recovered from

them, for which the proceeding under Section 13(1)(e) of

the Prevention of Corruption Act is said to have been

registered against the accused persons including the

present applicants herein. Further taking into account the

severity of the punishment prescribed for the aforesaid

offences and keeping in mind, the binding observations of

their Lordships of the Supreme Court in aforesaid cases

(supra), that corruption is a enemy of the nation and

tracking down corrupt public servants and punishing such

persons is a necessary mandate of the Prevention of

Corruption Act, 1988 and further taking in view that

corruption is really a human rights violation specially right

to life, liberty, equality and non-discrimination and it is an

economic obstacles to the realization of all human rights

and further taking into consideration that charge-sheet is

yet to be filed against the two co-accused persons, further

considering the nature of accusation and gravity of Page 20 of 23

21

offence, the applicants are charged which are extremely

serious and such offences are alleged to have been

committed by supplying sub-standard rice, that too, in the

State of Chhattisgarh, which is traditionally known as Rice

Bowl of India, therefore, in the considered opinion of this

Court, it is not proper to order release of present applicants

on regular bail for the reasons mentioned hereinabove.

Accordingly, I hereby decline the prayer for bail made by

the applicants.

21. Consequently, the bail applications filed by the

applicants under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. are rejected.

22. It is clarified, that the observations made in the

instant order is only for the purpose of considering the

application for grant of regular bail and shall not prejudice

any of the parties during the course of trial or thereafter.

23. Certified copy as per rules on usual charges.

Sd/-

(Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge

Soma

Page 21 of 23

22

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR


Sudhir Kumar Bhole ---- Applicant

Versus

State of Chhattisgarh ---- Non-applicant


Satish Kumar Kaiwarth ---- Applicant

Versus



Motilal Sahu ---- Applicant

Versus

The State of Chhattisgarh ---- Non-applicant


Dilip Kumar Sharma ---- Applicant

Versus


AND

Page 22 of 23

23


Kaushal Kishore Yadu ---- Applicant

Versus


HEAD NOTE

Applicants are not entitled for bail for offences under

Sections 11, 13 (1) (d), 13 (2), 13(1)(e) read with Section

13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988; 109, 120B,

409 and 420 of the IPC. Corruption is a human right

violation.

vkosndx.k Hkzz"Vkpkj fuokj.k vf/kfu;e ds /kkjk 11, 13 (1)(d),

13(2), 13¼1½¼³½ lgifBr /kkjk 13¼2½ ,oa Hkk0n0fo0 ds /kkjk 109,

120B, 409 vkSj 420 ds v/khu dkfjr vijk/k ds fy, tekur ds

vf/kdkjh ugha gSA Hkz"Vkpkj ekuo vf/kdkj dk mYya/ku gSA

Page 23 of 23

Documents

Applicants are not entitled for bail for offences under Sections 11, 13