Del. HC: Obtaining of Voice Samples of Accused Must be in Compliance with Telegraph Act  ||  P&H HC: Peaceful Protest is Not a Penal Offence Under Section 188 IPC  ||  All HC: AO Must Consider Form 10 u/s 17 Supplied After Limitation But Before Assessment is Completed  ||  Ker. HC Issues Guidelines on Handling Digital Evidence Containing Sexually Explicit Materials  ||  Del. HC: Cyber Crimes Dissuade Aspirations of Advanced 'Digital Bharat'  ||  Del. HC: Suspension of Entity Can’t be Continued Indefinitely  ||  Del. HC: Woman Can be 'Karta' of HUF  ||  SC: Court Can’t Impose Bail Condition that Husband Must Resume Conjugal Life with Wife  ||  SC Takes Suo Moto Cognizance of Cal. HC Judgment that Adviced Adolescents on Sexual Behavior  ||  JKL HC: Court Can’t be Guided by Personal Law While Deciding Apportionment of Compensation    

Brajendra Singh Bhadouriya vs. Central Bureau Of Investigation - (High Court of Delhi) (30 Nov 2022)

Bail cannot be declined to an accused only because the accused is charge-sheeted for a grave economic offence



Present is an application on behalf of the Petitioner under Section 439 read with Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) for the grant of regular bail. CBI filed the supplementary charge sheet without arresting the petitioner/accused. The Petitioner was summoned by the court pursuant to filing of the supplementary charge sheet. The Petitioner had duly appeared before the Learned Special Judge, CBI and moved a bail application. However subsequently, on his appearance, the Petitioner was taken into custody by the court rejecting his bail application. The petitioner continues to be in judicial custody since then.

It is also submitted that, the Petitioner had been co- operating with the investigation throughout. No recovery of any incriminating document/material has been made from/at the instance of the Petitioner.

There cannot be any quarrel about the proposition that bail cannot be declined to an accused only because the accused is charge-sheeted for a grave economic offence. In facts of the instant case, it is submitted on behalf of the Petitioner that, he never evaded the process of law during all these years since registration of the FIR in 2014 ; he has been joining the investigation as and when required ; he had not made any attempt of fleeing from justice. Same is not disputed. Petitioner has also submitted that investigation qua the petitioner has been completed.

Further, the supplementary charge sheet against the Petitioner, wherein the Petitioner has been implicated as accused/A-27, was filed, without arrest of the petitioner. The fact that so far, total 447 witnesses have been cited by the CBI vide charge sheets already filed in the matter, is not disputed. Petitioner's plea that it would take a long time in examination of these witnesses/conclusion of trial, more so, as the investigation is still continuing as per CBI, cannot also be disputed. The Petitioner is a government servant, (though stated to be under suspension) and is a family person and is not having any previous involvement.

In view of facts and circumstances and that the petitioner is a government servant, a family person, has been joining the investigation and cooperating in the investigation; and taking into account that the above co-accused persons have already been granted bail, trial in the matter would take a long time, the petitioner is admitted to bail on his furnishing a personal bond in a sum of Rs. 2,00,000 with one surety in the like amount, to the satisfaction of Learned trial Court, subject to the conditions.Bail application of the Petitioner is disposed off.


Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2023 - All Rights Reserved