IN THE COURT OF HON’BLE SPECIAL JUDGE, UNDER THE PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT, 1988, AT GR. BOMBAY ACB BAIL APPLICATION NO. 406 OF 2022 IN ACB REMAND APPLICATION NO. 625 OF 2022
IN C.R. NO. 29 OF 2022

Salim Mehboob Almelkar … Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra (At the instance of ACB, Mumbai, Vide C.R.No.29/2022) … Respondent

Appearances : –
Ld. Adv. Mr. A. M. Saraogi for the applicant/accused.

Ld. APP Ms. Geeta Nayyar for the State.

CORAM : H.H. THE SPECIAL JUDGE (ACB) DR. A. A. JOGLEKAR (C.R.NO.42) DATED : 15TH JUNE, 2022

ORDER

By this application the applicant Salim Mehboob Almelkar being accused in C.R.No. 29/2022 registered with ACB, Mumbai Division, Mumbai, for the offences punishable under Sections 7, 7(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, (hereinafter referred to as, “The PC Act”) seeks bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (In short, “CrPC”).

THE CASE OF PROSECUTION IN SHORT ENSUES AS UNDER;

2.The sleuth of ACB, Mumbai was in receipt of complaint from one Imranali Rehmat Ali Shaikh who had initiated construction of his new bunglow at open plot No. 43 at Malwani, Mhada, wherein after commencement of the work, the complainant had applied for a new water connection as on dated 06.06.2022. While the complainant was on the morning walk and an individual known to him by name Salim Almelkar i.e. applicant/accused met him and said that he can help him for legal water connection if the complainant pays Rs.1,00,000/- against it.

3. It is further stated that, the applicant/accused stated that, as the water connection would be in extra such amount is required to be paid. Thus, in this regard the complainant approached to ACB, Mumbai
Office as on 07.06.2022 and tendered his handwritten complaint.

Accordingly a verification was done as on 07.06.2022. During said verification the accused No. 1 in the presence of panchas demanded Rs.1,00,000/- and upon trap being laid the accused No. 1 accepted Rs.80,000/- from the complainant and Rs.20,000/- were told to be handed over to applicant/accused. Accordingly, as per the prosecution the trap was successful and the applicant/accused was duly intercepted on the spot, post compliances an offence was registered against the applicant/accused and the accused No. 1 and they were put under arrest.

4.Thereafter, the voice samples of the accused were taken as on 09.06.2022 and the search of residence of the accused No. 1 was also carried on wherein Rs.13,50,100/- alongwith 45 grams of Gold qua receipts thereof, 12 policies etc. was found at the residence and for which no cogent explanation was given by the applicant/accused and the said amounts alongwith the investments are in the form of disproportionate assets and the said facts are not pertaining to the applicant/accused.

5. Ld. Advocate for applicant/accused states that, the applicant/accused is falesly implicated. It is further stated that, the area in which the water connection is sought by the complainant is highly dense and is a slum area. It is further stated that, various illegal water connections have been taken by different persons and an officer by name Ritesh Manohar Jaiswal who decided to take action against such illegal water connections had also to face such cases against him. The Ld. Advocate for applicant/accused has filed the order of the Hon’ble High Court with regard to the said officer. It is further contended that, the wife of the applicant/accused is a social worker and Ex-Corporator.

The applicant/accused had raised objections with regard to the illegal water connection proposed to be procured by the complainant, he is falsely arrayed in the present matter. Moreover, the Applicant/accused is not a public servant and in no way has any connection with that of the accused No. 1. The Ld. Advocate for applicant/accused has also filed the application filed by him vide Exh.B with the Ex-Corporator’s office and lastly, the Ld. Advocate for applicant/accused prayed for enlargement of the applicant/accused on bail.

6.Per contra the prosecution has filed their reply vide Exh.2 and inter alia have resisted the application on various grounds. The prosecution categorically states that, the applicant/accused is a private person and that if he is enlarged on bail, he would not be available before this Court and would abscond, it is further stated that the applicant/accused has hereinbefore helped accused public servant in procuring bribes and the said fact has been revealed during the course of investigation. Considering the same the Ld. Prosecutor prayed for rejection of application.

7.Heard Ld. for the applicant/accused and Ld. APP for the State. Perused application, reply and the investigation papers.

8.The Ld. Advocate for applicant/accused has categorically stated that, the complainant himself has obtained the illegal connections and in order to waive of any such action against him has falsely implicated the applicant/accused. To that effect the Ld. Advocate for applicant/accused has relied upon the document filed at Exh.B. It is pertinent that in order to substantiate the initial theory of morning walk nothing has been placed on record, nor the applicant/accused was ever present at the time of alleged incident.

9. Ld. APP submits that, the applicant was held in police custody until 10.06.2022, thereafter, he is in judicial custody till date.

The prosecution has stated that, further documents and evidences are yet to be collected and that the statements of witnesses are yet to be recorded. Therefore, the only apprehension of the prosecution with regard to the abscondence and collection of documents and evidences can be taken care of. It is evident that the voice samples are obtained and the search of residence is also conducted and the tainted amount is also recovered from accused No.1. The applicant is a resident of Mumbai and it does not appear that there are any chances of abscondence. Therefore, as stated hereinabove the detention of the applicant/accused is not necessitated as the same can be taken care of by saddling stringent conditions on the applicant/accused. Thus, in the backdrop of the aforesaid facts, I hold that the application deserves to be allowed. Hence, order infra:-

ORDER

1.ACB Bail Application No. 406 of 2022 is allowed.

2.The applicant Salim Mehboob Almelkar being accused in C.R.No. 29/2022 registered with ACB, Mumbai Division, Mumbai, for the offences punishable under Section 7, 7(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, be released on furnishing P. R. bond of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand Only) with one or two sureties in the like amount.

3.The applicant Salim Mehboob Almelkar and his surety shall provide their respective residential addresses, mobile numbers and email addresses, if any.

4.The applicant Salim Mehboob Almelkar shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the present case to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court.

5. The applicant Salim Mehboob Almelkar shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner.

6. The applicant Salim Mehboob Almelkar shall attend ACB, Worli, Mumbai on every Friday between 11.00
a.m. and 4.00 p.m. until filing of charge-sheet.

7. The applicant Salim Mehboob Almelkar shall surrender his passport if any with the investigating officer. If the applicant doesn’t have passport, he will furnish an affidavit to that effect.

8. The applicant Salim Mehboob Almelkar shall not leave Maharashtra without permission of this Court.

9.ACB Bail Application No. 406 of 2022 stands disposed of accordingly.

ABHAY Digitally signed by ABHAY AVINASH AVINASH JOGLEKAR JOGLEKAR Date: 2022.06.15 17:21:35 +0530 (DR. A. A. JOGLEKAR) Special Judge, A.C.B. City Civil & Sessions Court, Date : 15.06.2022 Gr. Bombay (C.R.42) Dictated on : 15.06.2022 Transcribed on : 15.06.2022 HHJ signed on : 15.06.2022 Page 6 of 7 ACB B.A.No.406/2022 “CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.” Upload Date Upload Time Name of Stenographer Mahendrasing D. Patil 15.06.2022 05.20 p.m. (Stenographer Grade-I) Name of the Judge (With Court HHJ DR. A. A. JOGLEKAR
Room No.) (Court Room No. 42) Date of Pronouncement of 15.06.2022 JUDGMENT /ORDER JUDGMENT /ORDER signed by P.O. 15.06.2022 on JUDGMENT /ORDER uploaded on 15.06.2022