:1:
Bail Appl. No. 26/2018
IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL JUDGE FOR C.B.I.
FOR GREATER BOMBAY AT MUMBAI
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 26 OF 2018
IN
REMAND APPLICATION NO. 22 OF 2018
(R.C. No. BA1/2018/A0001C.B.I., A.C.B., Mumbai)
SHRI. ULHAS ANANDA LOKHADE,
Adult, Indian, Aged 51 years,
residing at Room No. 67, Saikinaka Chawl,
Behind Dharavi Road, Behind Dharavi
Post Office, Dharavi, Mumbai400 017.
(At present in Judicial Custody).
Applicant/
Orig. Accused No. 1
V/s.
CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION,
A.C.B., Mumbai.
Respondent/
Complainant
CORAM :
H.H. THE SPECIAL JUDGE,
SHRI. JAYENDRA C. JAGDALE,
(C. R. No. 51).
DATED :
8th January, 2018.
Mr. Ravi L. Gurnani, Ld. Advocate for the applicant/orig. accd. no. 1.
Mr. Soni, Ld. S.P.P. for the CBI/Respdt.
ORAL ORDER
1
This is an application placed by the applicant/original
accused no. 1 Shri. Ulhas Ananda Lokhande for bail u/sec. 439 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure against whom the offence punishable u/sec.
:2:
Bail Appl. No. 26/2018
7 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 has been registered by CBI vide
R.C. No. BA1/2018/A0001C.B.I., A.C.B., Mumbai.
2
Heard arguments advanced by Ld. Advocate for the
applicant/original accused no. 1 and Ld. S.P.P. for the CBI/Respondent.
The Ld. Advocate for applicant/accused has reiterated the contents of
application. The prosecution has raised objection to grant prayer in the
application. It has given say on the application. I have perused the
application
and
applicant/accused.
documents
produced
on
behalf
of
the
I have also perused the say given by the
prosecution.
3
The applicant/accused has contended that residential
premises of applicant/accused have been searched by the investigating
agency, but nothing incriminating was found or taken charge by the
CBI. He is put under arrest on 03/01/2018. He was produced before
the Court on 04/01/2018 along with a remand application, praying that
the applicant/accused be remanded to police custody till 08/01/2018.
On hearing the investigating officer and on perusing the remand
application, this Court was pleased to remand applicant/accused to
police custody till 06/01/2018. The applicant/accused is innocent and
he is falsely implicated in this case by the complainant. He has not
demanded/taken
any
illegal
gratification.
The
arrest
of
applicant/accused is in total violation of provisions of section 41 of
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, as enunciated by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in catena of decision.
The allegation against the
applicant/accused is that he demanded illegal gratification of Rs. 2
lacks and accepted illegal gratification of Rs. 1 lack from the
complainant.
The entire material is in the custody of CBI.
The
:3:
Bail Appl. No. 26/2018
applicant/accused is a permanent employee of Income Tax Department,
Government of India and is unlikely to abscond.
Keeping the
applicant/accused in custody along with hardcore criminals would
expose him to life of crime. Hence, the applicant/accused has prayed to
allow the application.
4
The prosecution has contended that the applicant/accused
has demanded Rs. 1,25,000/ from the complainant and caught red
handed while accepting Rs. 1,00,000/ from the complainant.
Rs.
1,25,000/ is a huge amount and there is a strong possibility of
conspiracy at larger level and that should be investigated and the other
officials of applicant/accused may be involved and this aspect is to be
investigated. Release of applicant/accused will affect the investigation,
as investigation is at a crucial stage. The material witnesses are being
identified for examination at this stage. Hence, the prosecution has
prayed to reject the application.
5
It appears from the record that in the present case, the
applicant/accused has been arrested for the offence punishable u/sec. 7
of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. It is alleged by the prosecution
that the applicant/accused has accepted Rs. 1,00,000/ from the
complainant as a bribe. It was recovered from in between the files. The
written complaint and verification, so also the alleged bribe amount are
in custody of CBI.
6
It further appears from the objection raised by the
investigating officer as well as Ld. S.P.P. of CBI that there is no specific
ground raised by the same for rejection of bail.
The grounds or
objection raised by the CBI doesn’t reveal that the present
:4:
Bail Appl. No. 26/2018
applicant/accused may flee from the clutches of law or he may not
appear at the time of hearing. There is no ground to presume that the
applicant/accused may tamper with the evidence or scuttle the process
of investigation. Obviously, there will be no useful purpose served by
keeping the applicant/accused in judicial custody.
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 trial will take its own time. Moreover, the applicant/accused has
assured to cooperate the investigating officer as and when required and
attend the trial.
The nature of offence is such that custody of
applicant/accused for further investigation is not required. If he is kept
in custody, there will be every possibility of his coming in contact with
harden criminals. However, considering the gravity of offence, heavy
surety is require to be taken from the applicant/accused. Therefore, in
the interest of justice, the applicant/accused can be released on bail
subject to certain conditions.
Accordingly, I proceed to pass the
following order :
ORDER
1
Bail Application No. 26/2018 in CBI Remand Application
No. 22/2018 (RC BA1/2018/A0001CBI, ACB, Mumbai) is hereby
allowed.
2
Applicant/original accused no. 1 SHRI. ULHAS ANANDA
LOKHANDE is hereby directed to be released on executing P.R. Bond of
Rs. 1,00,000/ (Rupees One Lac Only). Further, he is hereby directed to
furnish one or more sureties of the like amount within two months.
:5:
3
Bail Appl. No. 26/2018
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 disposal of trial.
8
Applicant/accused shall not commit any offence 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 allowed to be released
provisionally after furnishing cash bail of Rs. 1,00,000/.
11
The Registrar (Sessions) is hereby directed to accept the
cash amount of bail After Treasury Hours.
:6:
12
Bail Appl. No. 26/2018
Bail Application No. 26/2018 in CBI Remand Application
No. 22/2018 stands disposed of accordingly.
(Order dictated and pronounced in open court.)
(Jayendra C. Jagdale)
The Special Judge for CBI,
City Civil & Sessions Court,
Gr. Bombay.
Dated : 08/01/2018
Dictated on
Transcribed on
Signed on
Delivered to Certified
Copy Section on
: 08/01/2018
: 09/01/2018
: 09/01/2018
:
:7:
Bail Appl. No. 26/2018
“Certified to be true and correct copy of the original signed
judgment/order”.
Upload Date & Time : 09/01/2018 at 5.00 p.m.
Smt. G. K. Kotawadekar
Name of the Stenographer
H.H.J. SHRI. JAYENDRA C. JAGDALE (C. R. No. 51)
Date of pronouncement of judgment/order :08/01/2018
Judgment/order signed by the P.O. on :09/01/2018
Judgment/order uploaded on :09/01/2018