Mumbai, Thane [Current Location] – April 15, 2025 – The Special Judge for CBI at Greater Bombay has granted bail to Shri. Sharadchandran K. Swaminathan, a 55-year-old public servant, who was arrested in connection with a bribery case (R.C. No. BA1/2018/A0003) registered by the CBI, ACB, Mumbai. The order, dated January 23, 2018, was pronounced by H.H. the Special Judge Shri. Jayendra C. Jagdale (C. R. No. 51) in Bail Application No. 49 of 2018, filed in relation to Remand Application No. 38 of 2018.

Swaminathan, a Superintendent at CBEC, GST, Old Customs House, Mumbai, was accused of offenses punishable under Sections 7 and 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

According to the prosecution, Swaminathan had allegedly approached a co-accused, Ashish Parmathanand Thakur, an Assistant Section Officer at CBEC, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi, seeking favorable consideration for his pending promotion to the rank of Assistant Commissioner. It was alleged that Thakur demanded illegal gratification from Swaminathan for managing this process. The CBI further stated that Thakur engaged another co-accused, Ravindra Kumar Mandal, to accept the bribe on his behalf, leading to a trap where all three were apprehended during the delivery of the illegal gratification.

Mr. Sanjeev P. Kadam, the learned Advocate for Swaminathan, argued that there was no evidence indicating his client was part of the alleged illegal act. He contended that Swaminathan was falsely implicated due to prior complaints he had filed against CBI officers in connection with an earlier Income Tax Department raid. Mr. Kadam also pointed out that a CBI search of Swaminathan’s premises yielded nothing incriminating, urging the court to allow the bail application.

Mr. Omprakash, the learned S.P.P. for the CBI, opposed the bail, asserting that there was sufficient evidence on record indicating Thakur had demanded the bribe and that Mandal was caught accepting it on his behalf. The prosecution argued that the investigation was at an initial stage, and releasing Swaminathan could hamper its progress, potentially leading to the influencing of crucial witnesses who were yet to be examined. They also emphasized the serious nature of the allegations and their potential impact on society.

However, Special Judge Jagdale noted that all the accused in the case had already been arrested and subsequently released on temporary bail. The court observed that the investigation appeared to be nearing completion and that there was no apparent risk of Swaminathan absconding, considering he is a public servant with a permanent government job.

The court stated, “Moreover, there will be no propriety to keep the applicant/accused behind bar. An offence registered, is only u/sec. 7 & 12 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. There is no ground to presume that the applicant/accused may tamper with the evidence or scuttle the process of investigation. Obviously, the purpose of securing bail is to procure presence of accused during the trial. The presence of applicant/accused can be secured by imposing condition.”

The court further acknowledged Swaminathan’s assurance to cooperate with the investigating officer and attend the trial. Considering the nature of the offense and the stage of the investigation, the court found that Swaminathan’s continued custody for further investigation was not required. While recognizing the gravity of the offense, the court deemed that the interests of justice would be served by releasing him on bail subject to certain conditions.

Consequently, the court passed the following order:

1. Bail Application No. 49/2018 in CBI Remand Application No. 38/2018 (RC No. BA1/2018/A0003, CBI, ACB, Mumbai) is hereby allowed.
2. Applicant/original accused SHRI. SHARADCHANDRAN K. SWAMINATHAN is hereby directed to be released on executing P.R. Bond of ₹50,000 (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only). Further, he is hereby directed to furnish one or more sureties of the like amount within three months.
3. Applicant/accused is directed not to leave India without obtaining prior permission from this Court.
4. Further, till furnishing surety, the applicant/accused is directed to surrender his passport, if any, with CBI.
5. The applicant/accused is directed to furnish his permanent address as well as permanent contact numbers to the CBI.
6. The applicant/accused is directed to furnish addresses of his two relatives and their permanent addresses and contact numbers to the CBI.
7. Applicant/accused is further directed not to tamper with the prosecution evidence and to assist in the disposal of the trial.
8. Applicant/accused shall not commit any offense while on bail.
9. Breach of any of the above conditions will amount to cancellation of bail granted to the applicant/accused.
10. Applicant/accused is hereby directed to remain present before the investigating officer every Tuesday between 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. until further order.
11. The Registrar (Sessions) is hereby directed to accept the cash amount of bail After Treasury Hours.
12. Earlier interim cash bail granted vide order dated 12/01/2018 will be continued till furnishing fresh surety/ies.
13. Bail Application No. 49/2018 in CBI Remand Application No. 38/2018 stands disposed of accordingly.

The order, dictated and pronounced in open court on January 23, 2018, and subsequently signed and uploaded, indicates the court’s consideration of the stage of the investigation, the fact that all accused were already arrested, the accused’s status as a public servant with no apparent flight risk, and his assurance of cooperation as key factors in granting bail with conditions aimed at ensuring his presence during trial and preventing any interference with the legal process.