Anil Kumar vs The State of Jharkhand

Mr. Anant Bijay Singh, J.—Since all the three anticipatory bail applications arised out of one and the same case, hence they are taken up together and disposed of by common order.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with R.C. Case No. 04(A) of 2010AHDR, for the offence registered under Section 406, 409, 423, 424, 465, 120B and 420 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 11 & 13(2) read with Section 13(1) (e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

The prosecution case in short, is that, accused persons namely, Harinarayan Rai and Enos Ekka had misused their official powers and crossed the limits of corruptions and had misappropriated the money of public in a huge and the same was used by the accused persons for their personal gain and benefits. It is further alleged that accused Enos Ekka who was the then Minister in the State of Jharkhand has acquired huge property in the name of his wife Menon Ekka (co-accused) in violation of the provision of C.N.T. Act. Some properties situated in the Ranchi Town Police Station which belong to Schedule Tribe Community was also acquired in the name of Menon Ekka but as the purchaser namely Menon Ekka was not resident of Ranchi Town Police Station, hence to defeat statutory provision of the C.N.T Act and to legalize the said transfers of tribal lands Menon Ekka Connived with the then Govt. Officials including the Circle Inspector(petitioners) in the Ranchi Town Circle and submitted false affidavit showing her as the resident of same police station which the lands about to be sold was situated. Initially, a complaint case was filed in the Court of learned Additional Judicial Commissioner, Special Judge, Vigilance Ranchi being complaint case no. 02 of 2008 and was forwarded under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C and, accordingly, Vigilance P.S. Case No. 26 of 2008 was registered against the accused persons and the Hon''ble Court vide its order dated 04.08.2009 had been pleased to transfer the said case to the Central Bureau of Investigation and the case was numbered as R.C. Case No. 04(A)/2010AHDR(C). The matter was subsequently investigated by the C.B.I and the petitioners being the Circle Inspector at the relevant point of time have been made accused in this case.

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that petitioner Anil Kumar (in A.B.A. No.990 of 2016) was posted as Circle Inspector, Town Circle Office, Ranchi and forwarded the report prepared by the Karamchari. Learned counsel has submitted that petitioner (in A.B.A. No.991 of 2016) was posted as Circle Inspector, Ormanjhi Circle, Ormanjhi, Ranchi and forwarded the report prepared by the Karamchari. Learned counsel has submitted that petitioner (in A.B.A. No. 2592 of 2016) was posted as Circle Inspector at Ranchi. The said inquiry report was also recommended and forwarded by the then Anchal Adhikari (Circle Officer) of Ranchi Town Circle and ultimately the DCLR, Ranchi had accorded permission for the transaction of the above mentioned land between the vendor and the vendee. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that after investigation C.B.I has submitted final form on 10.12.2012 and cognizance has been taken on 11.12.2012. It is further submitted that coaccused of this case namely, Firoz Akhtar has already been granted anticipatory bail in A.B.A. No. 3128 of 2015 and coaccused persons namely, Brajeshwar Mahto and Goverdhan Baitha have already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in A.B.A. No. 3168 of 2015.

Learned standing counsel for the C.B.I opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail.

Taking all these facts, the above named petitioners are directed to surrender in the Court below within two weeks from the date of this order and in the event of their arrest or surrender the Court below shall enlarge the above named petitioners on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand)each, with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Sri Akhil Kumar, learned Special Judge, C.B.I, Ranchi, or his successor and to the satisfaction of Sri B.K. Tiwary, learned Special Judge, C.B.I at Ranchi or his successor (in A.B.A. No.2592 of 2016) in connection with R.C. Case No. 04(A) of 2010AHDR, subject to conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C and also subject to further condition that one of the bailers shall be local resident of Ranchi district, solvent person. Petitioners shall also deposit their Passport, if any, before the trial court and during trial, they will fully cooperate with the CBI and also appear physically before the court below as and when directed. If they want exemption from appearance, they will inform the CBI in advance and after taking necessary permission from Special Court, CBI, they may be exempted from personal appearance.