Bishwanath Agarwal @ Bishwanath Agrawal V. Union of India through CBI

A.B.A./6720/2022

AI Insights

The case involves Bishwanath Agarwal, who sought anticipatory bail in connection with allegations under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, concerning the management of ill-gotten money and involvement in a criminal conspiracy. The prosecution alleged that Agarwal facilitated the purchase of a luxury flat using illicit funds and managed loans of substantial amounts given to his son-in-law and another individual, which were allegedly used for paying interest in cash. The defense argued that the allegations were part of a previously charged case and that the investigation was complete with no further need for custodial interrogation. The CBI opposed the bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the allegations and the potential for tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 820858 (HC-JHARKHAND)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 20-03-2023
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: R.C.03(A)/2017-D, SLP (Crl) No.9327 of 2022
• Laws Referred To: P.C. Act, 1988
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: P A S PATI
• Assessee Lawyers: INDRAJIT SINHA; ROHIT SINHA; ABHISHEK AGARWAL; A KISHORE
• Keywords: Anticipatory bail; Criminal conspiracy; Custodial interrogation; Ill-gotten money
• Section: 13(2); 438(2); 13(1)(e)

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A. B. A. No. 6720 of 2022 Bishwanath Agarwal @ Bishwanath Agrawal .... .. ... Petitioner(s) Versus Union of India through CBI .. ... ...Opp. Party(s) ........... CORAM :HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY ......... For the Petitioner : Mr. Indrajit Sinha, Mr. Rohit Ranjan Sinha, Advocates Mr. Abhishek Agarwal, A. Kishore, Advocates For the CBI : Mr. P.A.S. Pati, Sr. SPP …... 07/ 20.03.2023. Apprehending his arrest, petitioner above-named has moved this Court for grant of anticipatory bail in connection with R.C.AC1 2018 A 0003 (Corresponding to R.C.03(A)/2018-D) registered under Sections 13(2) read with 13(1)(e) of the P.C. Act, 1988. Heard the parties. 2. As per the case of prosecution, there are two main allegations against the petitioner:- First allegation is that Flat No.21 WC, 21st, Oriana Block, Swarnamani, 33A, Canal Circular Road, Kolkata had been bought by one Tapas Kumar Dutta for a sum of Rs.4.11 Crores with the help of this petitioner and his company, M/s Jharnna Liquor Pvt. Ltd. The second allegation is that Tapas Kumar Dutta had given his ill- gotten money on loan to the son-in-law of this petitioner, Pramod Kumar Dhanuka and one Santosh Kumar Shah. Loan amount of Rs.2.5 Crores to accused, Santosh Kumar Shah and amount of Rs.1.65 Crores to Pramod Kumar Dhanuka on interest @ 6% per month and it is alleged that interest amount was being paid by Santosh Kumar Shah in cash through Shri Biswanath Agarwal (petitioner). 3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that so far the first allegation is concerned, it constitutes part of the charge in another case being R.C.03(A)/2017-D wherein this petitioner has also been arraigned as an accused for the same set of facts, as such, the accused cannot be prosecuted in two separate cases and further he has already been enlarged on bail in earlier case. 5. With regard to the second allegation, it is submitted that the charge- sheet has not been filed against son-in-law [Pramod Kumar Dhanuka]. It is not alleged that he was the recipient of the loan, but the same is against said Santosh Kumar Shah and he has been enlarged on bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP (Crl) No.9327 of 2022. The investigation is complete and chare-sheet has also been filed and there is no further requirement of custodial interrogation. 6. Learned Sr. SPP for the CBI has vehemently opposed the prayer, but he does not dispute the fact that acquisition of flat in the name of this petitioner is part of the charge in the earlier case. It is further submitted that cases pertained to criminal conspiracy in the earlier case for obtaining favourable order from Tapas Kumar Dutta who was the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax at the relevant time. It is submitted that the petitioner was managing the ill-gotten money of Tapas Kumar Dutta. . 7. Considering the submissions of learned counsel and the fact as discussed above, the anticipatory bail application is allowed. Hence, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of two weeks from the date of this order, the petitioner named above shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court below, subject to the following conditions :- (i) He will surrender his Passport, if any, issued in his name to the learned court below; (ii) He will abide by all the conditions under Section 438(2) Cr. P.C. (Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.) Sandeep/ "