Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + HC Indian Laws - 2018 (4) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (4) TMI 1846 - HC - Indian LawsGrant of Bail - acquiring assets disproportionate to his known source of legal income - Nature and gravity of charge and severity of punishment in the event of conviction - Possibility of AO meddling with investigation and tampering the evidence - Proposed marriage of AOs son - HELD THAT:- After conducting preliminary searches the value of disproportionate assets increased to ₹ 2,50,40,881/-. This figure does not include in itself the worth of valuable articles recovered from the locker of AO in SBI, Warasiguda Branch, Hyderabad. No doubt, in the grounds of bail application, it is the contention of AO that out of 19 items cited, items 1 to 4 and 6 to 13 alone belong to him and his family members and rest of the items belong to his sister-in-law and others. Even if the said contention is taken into consideration, the value of items 1 to 4 and 6 to 13 mentioned in remand report roughly comes to ₹ 2,16,78,881/-. However, his savings for the said period were only worth ₹ 88,54,000/-. Therefore, even if his contention is accepted, still the worth of disproportionate assets comes to ₹ 1,28,24,881/- - a careful scrutiny of the aforesaid figures would manifest that even if the contention of petitioner is accepted and some errors in the appraisal of the income, expenditure and assets are taken into consideration, still, AO possessing assets disproportionate to his income cannot be ruled out at this juncture. Of course, I must hasten that this is only a theoretical analysis to know about the existence or non-existence of prima facie case to consider the bail application. Ultimate truth has to be exhumed after investigation. Hence, there exists a strong prima facie case against AO which requires a thorough investigation. The contention of petitioner that the Registry of High Court has granted permission to register FIR in a post-haste manner does not hold water because, the letter dated 17.03.2018 of Director General, ACB to the Registrar General would show that upon securing permission, the ACB at first conducted discrete enquiry against AO and submitted a report and after satisfying with the prima facie material, the High Court accorded permission to register the FIR against AO. Hence it appears a methodical exercise was undertaken prior to registration of FIR. Nature and gravity of charge and severity of punishment in the event of conviction - HELD THAT:- It is not out of place here to mention that each time a Judicial Officer is accused of committing bribery or other related offence, the reputation of judicial institution itself stands for trial. The judicial edifice is built not with bricks and cement but with belief and confidence reposed by the public on the institution. That is why absolute honesty and integrity are regarded as the minimum qualifications for a Judicial Officer to hold the mace of justice. A minutest impious deed of even a single individual will bring disrepute to the majesty of justice. In that context, the impact of the offence has to be viewed even at the stage of bail, particularly when prima facie case is found out. Possibility of AO meddling with investigation and tampering the evidence - HELD THAT:- AO being Judicial Officer, there is a possibility of his finding out the ways to stifle the crucial evidence and scuttle the process of investigation with his legal acumen. Such a possibility cannot be obviated. The contention of AO that the entire investigation is completed with the searches conducted at various places and his service record is available with the High Court and hence, he cannot tamper with the evidence cannot be countenanced in view of the crucial part of investigation still left over. Ill-health of the petitioner/AO - HELD THAT:- The trial Court considering the discharge summary issued by NIMS, which revealed his fit condition, did not accede to grant bail on the health grounds - there are no reason to come to a different conclusion. Proposed marriage of AOs son - HELD THAT:- The petitioner only produced a manuscript of lagna patrika showing the marriage is fixed to be performed on 06.05.2018. No printed wedding card is produced for verification. Even assuming that his sons marriage is going to be held on 06.05.2018, in view of gravity of the offence and pending investigation at the crucial stage, a regular and full-fledged bail cannot be granted to AO at this stage. Bail application dismissed.
|