Bail Appl. No.227/23
1 of 6
R.A. No.301/23
MHCC020042752023
CNR NO.MHCC02­004275­2023
IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL JUDGE ( CBI) FOR GREATER BOMBAY
ORDER BELOW BAIL APPLICATION NO.227/2023
IN
RC­No.0262023A0020, CBI, ACB, Mumbai
IN
REMAND APPLICATION NO.301/2023
Rajesh Kumar Jha
Age­45 Occ.­Service,
Presently residing at C 1202,
Sky Oasis, Plot No.­29, Sector­9,
Ulwe, Near CIDCO Water Treatment
Plant, Ulwe Wahal, Raigad­410206.

… Applicant/Accused
Vs.
CBI, ACB, Mumbai
… Prosecution.

Appearances :
Ld. Adv.Mahesh Yadav for applicant/accused.
Ld. SPP P.K.B. Gaikwad for respondent/CBI.,ACB, Mumbai.
CORAM : H.H.THE SPECIAL JUDGE (CBI)
M.R.PURWAR
DATED : 24.03.2023 (C.R.NO. 53)
..2..

Bail Appl. No.227/23
2 of 6
R.A. No.301/23
ORDER
The applicant/accused Rajesh Kumar Jha has filed present
application for grant of regular bail.
2.

It is the case of the prosecution that on 15.03.2023 a case
vide RC No.0262023A0020 under Section 7 of PC Act against the
accused, working as Chief Commercial Inspector, Central Railway,
CSMT, Mumbai on the basis of written complaint dated 13.03.2023 of
Mr.Ramavatar Meena, Ticket Checker, Central Railway Mumbai
regarding demand of bribe by accused.
3.

It is further case of the prosecution that the verification of
the complaint was conducted on 14.03.2023 and on 15.03.2023 after
registration of the FIR, a trap was laid wherein accused Rajesh Kumar
Jha was caught red handed while demanding and accepting bribe of
Rs.20,000/­ from complainant.
4.

On 16.03.2023 this Court had remanded above accused to
police custody and on 18.03.2023 the accused was remanded to judicial
custody as prayed by the investigation officer.
5.

It is the case of the applicant/accused that he has not
committed any offence and involved in a false case. He is permanent
residence of the given address and is a public servant. There is no
chance of absconding. The bribe amount is recovered, voice sample
collected and nothing remained to recover. The case is based on the
documentary evidence. All witnesses and accused as well is public
servant and as such no chances of threatening arises. He is ready to
..3..

Bail Appl. No.227/23
3 of 6
R.A. No.301/23
abide with all the terms. He is not having past criminal record. He
prayed for grant of bail.
6.

The prosecution has objected the prayer by filing reply. It is
contended that offence is serious in nature. There is sufficient material
to show prima facie case. Number of witness are yet to be examined
and documentary evidence is yet to be collected possibility of tampering
and hampering cannot be ruled out. The prosecution has prayed for
rejection of the application.
7.

Heard Ld. Advocate for the applicant/accused and Ld. SPP
for CBI.

8.

The Ld. Advocate for the accused has relied upon following
case laws.
a.

Satender Kumar Antil V/s. Central Bureau of
Investigation, (2022) 10 SCC 51.

b.

Khemlo Sakharam Sawant V/s. State, 2002 (1)
Bom.C.R.689 (Bombay High Court).

c.

Prakash Shripat Dalvi V/s. The State of Maharashtra,
Bail Application (Stamp) No.17287/2021 decided on
05.11.2021 (Bombay High Court).

9.

Per Contra, it is argued by the Ld. SPP that the offence is
serious is nature. The applicant was caught red handed while accepting
bribe amount from the complainant. There is prima facie case against
..4..

Bail Appl. No.227/23
4 of 6
R.A. No.301/23
the applicant/accused. The investigation is at crucial stage and
possibility of tampering cannot be ruled out. He prayed for rejection of
application.

10.

I have given mindful consideration to the submission and
perused the record. I have also gone through with the observation of
the case laws cited supra and very much guided.

11.

It is the case of the prosecution that on the basis of written
complaint of the complainant, the verification proceedings was
conducted to verify the demand of bribe. It is further case of the
prosecution that a successful trap was laid wherein accused Rajesh Jha
was caught after he had accepted the bribe amount of Rs.20,000/­ from
the complainant and said amount was recovered in presence of
witnesses. Thus, basically the case in hand is in respect of demand and
acceptance of bribe amount of Rs.20,000/­ for reducing charges against
the complainant in disciplinary action. During the course of
investigation the search of the residence of accused person came to be
conducted. Mobile phone came to be recovered. Certain documents
including file of disciplinary action have also been seized. The voice
sample of the accused is also stated to be collected. All panchnama have
already been prepared. The statement of some of the witnesses have
also been recorded. Thus, it appears that the material investigation is
completed.

12.

After sufficient period of police custody, the investigating
officer has himself claimed judicial custody of accused. The copy of
..5..

Bail Appl. No.227/23
5 of 6
R.A. No.301/23
Adhar Card of accused show the address of residence as Raigad. The Ld.
SPP has expressed apprehension about tampering and hampering.
However, nothing brought on record to substantiate the same.
Moreover all the witnesses in the present matter appears to be public
servant. There is nothing on record to show criminal antecedent against
accused.

Moreover the anxiety of Ld. SPP can be taken care of by
imposing certain conditions. In the given facts and circumstances of the
case, taking into consideration the nature of the accusations, the
severity of the punishment, the nature of the evidence and for the
reason referred above as well as the very fact of the trap, the discretion
can be exercised on certain stringent conditions. Thus, I pass the
following order:­
ORDER
1.

Bail Application No.227/2023 is hereby allowed.

2.

Applicant/accused Rajesh Kumar Jha be released on bail on
furnishing PR Bond of Rs.30,000/­ (Rs. Thirty thousand only)
with one or more sureties in the like amount in FIR RC
No.0262023A0020 (Remand Application No.301/2023) at the
instance of CBI, ACB, Mumbai for the offences punishable under
Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (As amended
in 2018).

3.

The
applicant/accused
shall
furnish
correct
detail
permanent/temporary residential address, office address ( if any)
with landline, mobile phone numbers, E­mail ID’s and name of
two persons with all particulars who should be contacted in
future when accused remains absent.

..6..

Bail Appl. No.227/23
4.

6 of 6
R.A. No.301/23
The applicant/accused shall submit undertaking to submit
change in address, in future, if any.

5.

The applicant/accused shall not leave India without prior
permission of the Court.

6.

The applicant/accused shall not tamper the evidence in the case
or influence any witness in the case.

7.

The applicant/accused shall not commit any offence during the
period he is released on bail.

8.

Breach of any of the conditions will be a ground to cancel the
bail.

9.

Bail Application No.227/2023 is hereby disposed off accordingly.
Digitally signed by
MANOJKUMAR
RAMESHCHANDRA
PURWAR
Date: 2023.03.24
16:16:28 +0530
Mumbai:
Date: 24.03.2023
Typed on
Signed on
:
:
(M.R.PURWAR)
Special Judge (CBI)
Court Room No.53,
Gr. Bombay.
24.03.2023
24.03.2023
..7..

Bail Appl. No.227/23
7 of 6
R.A. No.301/23
“Certified to be true and correct copy of the original signed order”.
24.03.2023
at about 4.15 P.M.

(Pushpa Rajan Vengurlekar)
Stenographer (H.G.)
Court Room No.53
Name of the Hon’ble Judge
: Shri. M.R.Purwar
(Court Room No.53)
Date of pronouncement of Judgment/Order
: 24.03.2023.

Judgment/Order signed by Hon’ble Judge on : 24.03.2023.
Judgment/Order uploaded on
: 24.03.2023.

….