9911796707🚨 Important Update for Our Users
We are transitioning to our new and improved portal - www.taxtmi.com - for a better experience.
Follow us:
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (5) TMI 896 - SC - Indian LawsGrant of bail - Held that - 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 grave offences affecting the economy of the country as a whole and thereby posing serious threat to the financial health of the country. While granting bail the court has to keep in mind the nature of accusations the nature of evidence in support thereof the severity of the punishment which conviction will entail the character of the accused circumstances which are peculiar to the accused reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused at the trial reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with the larger interests of the public/State and other similar considerations. Taking note of all these facts and the huge magnitude of the case and also the request of the CBI asking for further time for completion of the investigation in filing the charge sheet(s) without expressing any opinion on the merits we are of the opinion that the release of the appellant at this stage may hamper the investigation. However we direct the CBI to complete the investigation and file the charge sheet(s) within a period of 4 months from today. Thereafter as observed in the earlier order dated 05.10.2012 the appellant is free to renew his prayer for bail before the trial Court and if any such petition is filed the trial Court is free to consider the prayer for bail independently on its own merits without being influenced by dismissal of the present appeal.
1. ISSUES PRESENTED and CONSIDERED
The core legal question considered by the Court was whether the appellant, accused of serious economic offences involving corruption and criminal conspiracy, had made out a case for grant of bail. This encompassed several subsidiary issues, including:
2. ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSIS Issue 1: Whether the appellant has made out a case for bail given the nature of the offences and stage of investigation. The legal framework governing bail, especially in cases of serious economic offences, requires the Court to consider the nature and gravity of the accusations, the evidence, and the likelihood of the accused influencing the investigation or witnesses. The Court emphasized that economic offences constitute a distinct category requiring a more stringent approach due to their complex conspiracies and potential impact on the country's financial health. Precedents and principles cited include the need to weigh the severity of punishment upon conviction, the character and influence of the accused, and the larger public interest. The Court recognized that the appellant was alleged to be the prime conspirator and ultimate beneficiary in a series of transactions involving huge sums of money and public resources. The CBI's counter affidavit and status report detailed ongoing investigations into seven distinct conspiracies involving various companies and entities, with transactions amounting to thousands of crores of rupees. The investigation had progressed with charge sheets filed in respect of some entities but was continuing for others, with several crucial witnesses yet to be examined. The Court noted the appellant's significant financial and political clout, which raised a reasonable apprehension that release on bail could lead to witness tampering and evidence tampering. The CBI also pointed to attempts by certain persons to evade investigation and the possibility of influence exerted by the appellant and associates on witnesses abroad. Applying the law to facts, the Court found that the appellant had not made out a sufficient case for bail. The risk to the investigation and public interest outweighed the appellant's liberty claim at this stage. The Court also rejected the appellant's argument based on non-compliance with statutory timelines for investigation (Section 167 CrPC), considering the complexity and magnitude of the case justified the extended investigation period. Issue 2: Whether the ongoing investigation and incomplete charge-sheet filing precluded the grant of bail. The Court referred to its earlier order dated 05.10.2012, which had dismissed a special leave petition and explicitly allowed the appellant to renew bail applications after completion of investigation and filing of a consolidated charge-sheet. The CBI had assured expeditious investigation and filing of charge sheets in respect of the seven matters. The Court examined the CBI's status report and found that while investigation in some matters (e.g., Dalmia Cements) was complete and charge sheets filed, investigations in others were still in progress, with some crucial witnesses yet to be examined. The CBI also highlighted the complexity of the investigations, involving voluminous documents and multiple entities. The Court accepted the CBI's request for additional time to complete the investigation and file charge sheets, recognizing the practical difficulties in concluding such a wide-ranging probe within statutory timelines. It held that the ongoing investigation and incomplete charge-sheet filing justified denial of bail at this stage, as premature release could hamper the investigation. Issue 3: The approach to bail in economic offences involving large-scale corruption and public injury. The Court reiterated the principle that economic offences are a class apart and demand a different approach in bail matters. Given the deep-rooted conspiracies and the scale of public loss, such offences require serious judicial scrutiny before granting bail. The Court emphasized the need to consider the larger interests of the public and the State, alongside the accused's individual circumstances. The Court underscored that the nature of evidence, the severity of potential punishment, and the accused's influence must be carefully evaluated. It noted that the appellant's role as the prime conspirator and beneficiary of illegal gratification made the case particularly serious. Issue 4: The procedural direction for completion of investigation and future bail applications. While dismissing the bail application, the Court directed the CBI to complete the investigation and file all charge sheets within four months. It reiterated that the appellant was free to renew his bail application before the trial court after the investigation's completion, and that the trial court must consider such application independently on its merits, uninfluenced by the dismissal of the present appeal. 3. SIGNIFICANT HOLDINGS The Court held:
The Court's final determination was to dismiss the appeal against the High Court's order denying bail, while directing the CBI to complete investigation within a stipulated period and permitting the appellant to renew bail applications thereafter. The decision underscores the judiciary's cautious approach in granting bail in complex economic offences involving high-profile accused and significant public interest, balancing individual liberty with the integrity of investigation and prosecution.
|
