NDLI: Central Bureau of Investigation Vs. Santosh Karnani & Anr

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	Bail ss. 7 1988 s. 41A Anticipatory baill 438 Prevention of Corruption Act 13(2) 13(1) Cr.P.c Relevant factors for grant or refusal
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Act(s) Referred	Constitution of India Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985) Border Security Force Act, 1968 (47 of 1968)
Case(s) Referred	Referred Case 0 Referred Case 1 Referred Case 2 Referred Case 3 Referred Case 4 Referred Case 5 Referred Case 6 Referred Case 7
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Appeal Disposed Off
Headnote	Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 – ss. 7, 13(1), 13(2) – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s. 41A, 438 – Constitution of India – Art. 21 – Tax Department initiated search and seizure action against the complainant’s company – Respondent- Additional Commissioner of Income Tax was handling the case of the complainant – Allegation against the respondent that he made a demand of illegal gratification to help the complainant with his case – The said conversation of demand between the complainant and the respondent was recorded in a digital voice recorder – A trap was then laid – Respondent had asked to deposit an amount in a firm’s account – Complainant’s employee was sent to the firm with the bribe amount along with personnel from the ACB trap team and the bribe amount was deposited with the firm and it was acknowledged by the respondent to the complainant over a call – Thereafter, when an ACB team went to arrest the respondent, he along with the staff members physically assaulted the ACB team and escaped the office – FIR was registered u/ss. 7, 13(1) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 – Respondent preferred an application for grant of anticipatory bail before the Special Judge, which was rejected – However, the same was allowed by the High Court with a direction that despite anticipatory bail, the CBI could apply for police remand of the respondent and that upon the completion of the police remand, the respondent would be set free immediately – On appeal, held: The purported recording of conversation between the complainant and respondent wherein he thanked the complainant, after the deposit of amount in the firm’s account, is a reasonable link to connect respondent with the deposit of illegal gratification in firm, thereby prima facie showing acceptance thereof – The manner in which respondent forcefully evaded his arrest with the help of his colleagues and got the evidence destroyed, is a strong circumstance to indicate his complicity at this stage – There appears to be a well-organised syndicate comprising officers and officials of the Income Tax Department, businessmen and Hawala traders, who are in tandem – Such a nexus needs to be unearthed through investigation – Therefore, the impugned judgment and order of the High Court set aside and the anticipatory bail application of respondent dismissed.Bail – Anticipatory bail – Relevant factors for grant or refusal of anticipatory bail – The judicial discretion of the Court shall be guided by various relevant factors and largely it will depend upon the facts and circumstances of each case – The Court must draw a delicate balance between liberty of an individual as guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution and the need for a fair and free investigation, which must be taken to its logical conclusion.Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 – s. 17A – Prior Approval of Investigation – Requirement of – The First Proviso to S. 17A states that such approval is not necessary in cases involving arrest of the person on the spot on the charges of accepting undue advantage – Also, a prior approval or sanction to investigate such an officer in a trap case is likely to defeat the very purpose of trap and the investigation, which is not the underlying intention of the legislature. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s. 438 – Cancellation of Bail – Cancellation of bail must be done only for cogent and overwhelming reasons – All that to be ensured is that the High Court exercises its discretion judiciously, cautiously and strictly in conformity with the basic principles laid down by the Supreme Court from time to time in series of decisions.
Judge	Hon'ble Mr. Justice Surya Kant
Neutral Citation	2023 INSC 380
Petitioner	Central Bureau Of Investigation
Respondent	Santosh Karnani & Anr
SCR	[2023] 3 S.C.R. 476
Judgement Date	2023-04-17
Case Number	1148

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

Central Bureau of Investigation Vs. Santosh Karnani & Anr

Please Log-in to view this content

Shri P. Chidambaram Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation

R.p.s. Yadav Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation

M.c. Gupta Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation, Dehradun

Naveen Kaushik Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation

Puneet Dalmia Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation, Hyderabad

Sanghian Pandian Rajkumar Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr.

V.k.puri Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation

Central Bureau of Investigation Vs. Subodh Kumar Dutta and Anr.

Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency P. Ltd. and Anr. Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation

Central Bureau of Investigation Vs. Santosh Karnani & Anr

Central Bureau of Investigation Vs. Santosh Karnani & Anr

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

Shri P. Chidambaram Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation

R.p.s. Yadav Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation

M.c. Gupta Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation, Dehradun

Naveen Kaushik Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation

Puneet Dalmia Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation, Hyderabad

Sanghian Pandian Rajkumar Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr.

V.k.puri Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation

Central Bureau of Investigation Vs. Subodh Kumar Dutta and Anr.

Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency P. Ltd. and Anr. Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation

Central Bureau of Investigation Vs. Santosh Karnani & Anr