:1:
Bail Appl. No. 48/2018
IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL JUDGE FOR C.B.I.
FOR GREATER BOMBAY AT MUMBAI
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 48 OF 2018
IN
REMAND APPLICATION NO. 38 OF 2018
(R.C. No. BA1/2018/A0003, CBI, ACB, Mumbai)
SHRI. RAVINDRA KUMAR MANDAL,
Aged 33 years, Residing at Room No. 2380,
Building No. 56, Sectorн7, Antop Hill,
Mumbaiн400 037.
(At present lodged in judicial custody).

Applicant/
Orig. Accused No. 2
V/s.
CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION,
ACB, Mumbai.

Respondent/
Complainant
CORAM :
H.H. THE SPECIAL JUDGE,
SHRI. JAYENDRA C. JAGDALE,
(C. R. No. 51).

DATED :
23rd January, 2018.

Mr. N.D. George, Ld. Advocate for the applicant/orig. accd. no. 2.
Mr. Omprakash, Ld. S.P.P. for the CBI/ACB/Respdt.

ORAL ORDER
1
This is an application placed by the applicant/original
accused no. 2 for bail u/sec. 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure
against whom the offence punishable u/sec. 7 & 12 of Prevention of
Corruption Act, 1988 has been registered by CBI, ACB, Mumbai.

:2:
2
Bail Appl. No. 48/2018
Heard arguments advanced by Ld. Advocate for the
applicant/original accused no. 2 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
documents
applicant/accused.

produced
on
behalf
of
the
I have also perused the say given by the
prosecution.
3
The applicant/accused has contended that few months back
the coнaccused S.K. Swaminathan had approached the coнaccused
Ashish Parmathanand Thakur in his office for favorable consideration of
his file pertaining to promotion to the rank of Assistant Commissioner,
which was pending on account of certain disciplinary proceeding
initiated against him. It is alleged by the CBI that the coнaccused Ashish
Thakur, who works as Assistant Section Officer, ADнII Section, Central
Board of Excise and Customs (CBEC), Ministry of Finance, New Delhi
had
demanded
illegal
gratification
from
the
coнaccused
S.K.

Swaminathan, working as Superintendent, CBEC at GST, Old Customs
House, Mumbai for favorably managing/processing his file for
promotion. There is neither any evidence that the applicant/accused
was a part of illegal act of demanding illegal gratification from the coн
accused S.K. Swaminathan, nor any incriminating documents have been
seized from the applicant/accused. Hence, the applicant/accused has
prayed to allow the application.
4
Kumar
The prosecution has contended that the accused Ashish
Thakur
has
demanded
illegal
gratification
from
S.K.

:3:
Bail Appl. No. 48/2018
Swaminathan for favorable managing his promotion matter in lieu of
which, he has approached few months back to him.

Ashish Kumar
Thakur engaged the applicant/accused to accept the aforesaid illegal
gratification from S.K. Swaminathan.

The trap was laid and the
accused persons were caught while delivery of illegal gratification.
There is sufficient evidence on record. The investigation of the case is
at initial stage.

If the applicant/accused is released on bail, it will
hamper the progress of investigation. The crucial witnesses are yet to
be examined. The allegations against the applicant/accused are of a
very serious nature and the acts of applicant/accused have a bearing on
the society. 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
& 12 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. It has been argued on
behalf of the investigating authority that the crucial witnesses are yet to
be examined and the applicant/accused may influence the witnesses
and may tamper with the evidence.

It has to be seen that all the
accused were already arrested and they were released on temporary
bail. The investigation indicates that it is nearly completed. There is no
possibility of absconding of the applicant/accused.

It has to be
remembered that the applicant/accused is a public servant and he is
having permanent job in government.

Moreover, there will be no
propriety to keep the applicant/accused behind bar.

An offence
registered, is only u/sec. 7 & 12 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
There is no ground to presume that the applicant/accused may tamper
with the evidence or scuttle the process of investigation. Obviously, the
purpose of securing bail is to procure presence of accused during the
trial. The presence of applicant/accused can be secured by imposing
:4:
condition.

Bail Appl. No. 48/2018
The trial will take its own time.

Moreover, the
applicant/accused has assured to coнoperate 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 :н
ORDER
1
Bail Application No. 48/2018 in CBI Remand Application
No. 38/2018 (RC No. BA1/2018/A0003, CBI, ACB, Mumbai) is hereby
allowed.
2
Applicant/original accused no. 2 SHRI. RAVINDRA KUMAR
MANDAL is hereby directed to be released on executing P.R. Bond of
Rs. 50,000/н (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only).

Further, he is hereby
directed to furnish one or more sureties of the like amount within three
months.
3
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:
5
Bail Appl. No. 48/2018
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 directed to remain present
before investigating officer on every Tuesday in between 10.00 a.m. to
4.00 p.m. till further order.
11
The Registrar (Sessions) is hereby directed to accept the
cash amount of bail After Treasury Hours.
12
Earlier interim cash bail granted vide order dated
12/01/2018 will be continued till furnishing fresh surety/ies.

:6:
13
Bail Appl. No. 48/2018
Bail Application No. 48/2018 in CBI Remand Application
No. 38/2018 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 : 23/01/2018
Dictated on
Transcribed on
Signed on
Delivered to Certified
Copy Section on
: 23/01/2018
: 24/01/2018
: 24/01/2018
:
:7:
Bail Appl. No. 48/2018
УCertified to be true and correct copy of the original signed
judgment/orderФ.
Upload Date & Time : 24/01/2018 at 5.05 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 :н23/01/2018
Judgment/order signed by the P.O. on :н24/01/2018
Judgment/order uploaded on :н24/01/2018