Gujarat High Court

Bimal Ramgopal Agrawal @ Bimal ... vs Central Bureau Of Investigation on 10 November, 2023

Bench: M. R. Mengdey

                                                                                    NEUTRAL CITATION




     R/CR.MA/7350/2023                                ORDER DATED: 10/11/2023

                                                                                     undefined




            IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

 R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR SUCCESSIVE REGULAR BAIL -
             AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 7350 of 2023

==========================================================
              BIMAL RAMGOPAL AGRAWAL @ BIMAL AGARWAL
                               Versus
                  CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
==========================================================
Appearance:
ADITYA R PARIKH(8769) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
HARSH K RAVAL(9068) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR RC KODEKAR(1395) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. R. MENGDEY

                              Date : 10/11/2023

                               ORAL ORDER

1. This application is filed under Section 439

of the Code of Criminal Procedure for regular

bail in connection with F.I.R. No.3(A) of

2015 registered with CBI/AC-III Police

Station, District New Delhi, for the offences

punishable under Section 120(B) of the Indian

Penal Code, 1860 and Section 7, 12, 13(2)

r/w. Section 13(1)(d) of Prevention of

Corruption Act, 1988.

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.MA/7350/2023 ORDER DATED: 10/11/2023

undefined

2. Learned senior advocate Mr. J. M. Panchal

appearing for the applicant submits that the

applicant is in jail in connection with the

aforesaid offence for a period of more than

one year and trial has been delayed for no

fault of the present applicant. He further

submits that the main accused persons have

been considered for grant of regular bail

and therefore, the present applicant is also

entitled to be enlarged on bail. Learned

senior counsel fairly submits that the

present applicant was also ordered to be

enlarged on bail by the learned Sessions

Court. However, the said order was

challenged before this Court and the order

granting bail to the present applicant was

quashed and set aside by this Court, which

was confirmed by the Hon'ble Apex Court.

However, having regard to the facts that the

applicant is in custody for a period of one

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.MA/7350/2023 ORDER DATED: 10/11/2023

undefined

year and trial has not proceeded further,

the submissions of learned senior counsel to

the case of the present applicant should be

considered for grant of bail.

2.1 Learned senior advocate Mr. Panchal, in

support of his submissions, places reliance

on the judgments of the Honourable Apex

Court rendered in the cases of Ramesh

Chander Singh vs. High Court of Allahabad

and Another reported in (2007) 4 SCC 247,

Junaid vs. the State of Gujarat order passed

in Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal)

No.11608 of 2022, LT. COL. Prasad Shrikant

Purohit vs. State of Maharashtra reported in

(2018) 11 SCC 458 and Sanjay Jha vs. State

of Chhattisgarh reported in (2014) 3 SCC

202.

3. The learned advocate Mr. R. C. Kodekar

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.MA/7350/2023 ORDER DATED: 10/11/2023

undefined

appearing for the respondent - Central

Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has opposed

the present application stating that the

main accused namely, Mr. J. P. Singh, who at

that relevant point of time, was working as

a Joint Director in the Enforcement

Directorate, Ahmedabad, was in touch with

the present applicant on mobile phone and

present applicant was acting as conduit of

the said main accused. The other co-accused,

namely, Surendra Kalra has turned approver

and thus, on the said ground has been

ordered to be enlarged on bail. He further

submits that the proceedings of trial have

been stayed by this Court at the behest of

the present applicant vide order dated

02.02.2023 passed in Special Criminal

Application No.1060 of 2023 and other allied

matters and because of the said order the

trial is not proceeding further.

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.MA/7350/2023 ORDER DATED: 10/11/2023

undefined

3.1 Learned advocate Mr. Kodekar submits that it

has come on record subsequently that while

being on bail, the applicant had pressurized

the witnesses to the case of prosecution and

subsequently the Charge-sheet also came to

be filed against the present applicant to

the said effect. He submits that the order

of this Court cancelling the bail granted to

the present applicant has been confirmed by

the Hon'ble Apex Court. He submits that even

after the order of this Court cancelling the

bail was confirmed by the Hon'ble Apex

Court, the present applicant did not

surrender in time and had instead committed

another offence at Bhavnagar. He further

submits that there is no change in

circumstances after bail granting to the

present applicant was cancelled. There are

other antecedents against the present

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.MA/7350/2023 ORDER DATED: 10/11/2023

undefined

applicant. He, therefore, submits that the

present application is required to be

dismissed.

3.2 Learned advocate Mr. Kodekar, in support of

his submissions, places reliance on the

judgments of the Honourable Apex Court

rendered in the cases of State of T. N. vs.

S. A. Raja reported in (2005) 8 SCC 380,

Nimmagadda Prasad vs. Central Bureau of

Investigation reported in (2013) 7 SCC 466,

State of U. P. vs. Amarmani Tripathi with

State of U. P. vs. Madhumani Tripathi

reported in (2005) 8 SCC 2, Shahzad Hasan

Khan vs. Ishtiaq Hasan Khan and Another

reported in (1987) 2 SCC 684, State of

Maharashtra vs. Captain Buddhikota Subha Rao

reported in 1989 Supp (2) SCC 605 and State

of M. P. vs. Kajad reported in (2001) 7 SCC

673.

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.MA/7350/2023 ORDER DATED: 10/11/2023

undefined

4. I have heard learned advocates appearing for

the respective parties and perused the

papers of record.

5. At the outset, it is required to be noted

that the present applicant had preferred

Criminal Misc. Application No.161 of 2017

before the Special C.B.I. Court, Ahmedabad

(Rural) for being enlarged on bail. The

learned Special Court vide its order dated

12.05.2017 had been pleased to allow the

said application and enlarged the applicant

on bail subject to certain conditions.

Against the said order, the respondent - CBI

had filed Criminal Misc. Application

No.15116 of 2017 before this Court under

Section 439(2) of the Criminal Procedure

Code for cancelling the bail. The said

application filed by the CBI came to be

allowed by this Court vide order dated

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.MA/7350/2023 ORDER DATED: 10/11/2023

undefined

23.09.2022. The present applicant had

carried the said order to the Hon'ble Apex

Court by filing Special Leave (Criminal)

Appeal No.9775 of 2022, which came to be

dismissed by the Hon'ble Apex Court vide

order dated 15.11.2022. However, while

dismissing the said application, the Hon'ble

Apex Court had granted permission to the

present applicant to file an application

afresh for bail in case of change in

circumstances/after reasonable time i.e. 4

months.

6. Thus, these facts clearly indicate that the

applicant was once ordered to be enlarged on

bail by the learned Special Court and the

said bail had been cancelled by this Court

as stated herein-above and the same was also

confirmed by the Hon'ble Apex Court. This

Court while passing order dated 23.09.2022

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.MA/7350/2023 ORDER DATED: 10/11/2023

undefined

in Criminal Misc. Application No.15116 of

2017 has considered the fact that the

applicant had obtained amount of Rs.2.75

Crore from one Manoj Jain and Rs.15 Lacs

from the co-accused Surender Kalra in the

name of Mr. J. P. Singh. This Court has

further observed that the present applicant

is having a specific role in the alleged

conspiracy hatched. This Court had also

considered manner in which the prosecution

witnesses have been contacted by the present

applicant. The present applicant appears to

be a prime connecting link in the entire

connection of alleged crime. This Court has

further observed that there is enough

material available against the present

applicant about justification of

apprehension of CBI to believe that if the

opponent no.2 i.e. the present applicant is

allowed to remain on liberty, a definite

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.MA/7350/2023 ORDER DATED: 10/11/2023

undefined

stand deserves to be accepted about

apprehension about him trying to influence

the material witnesses of the case. This

Court has also recorded that in December,

2021, the prosecution agency came to know

about a pen-drive and after scrutiny of the

said pen-drive, it was revealed that the

present applicant had recorded his

convirsation with the witnesses Manoj Jain

and Chirag Parekh in which he was clearly

seen to be influencing those witnesses. This

Court had also recorded the facts that the

present applicant has also been investigated

by Mumbai Police in two other cases bearing

EOW (CR) No.29 of 2012 and EOW (CR) No.23 of

2016, wherein also the applicant is having a

specific role.

7. From the aforesaid observations made by this

Court while cancelling bail granted to the

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.MA/7350/2023 ORDER DATED: 10/11/2023

undefined

present applicant, it appears that after the

present applicant was ordered to be enlarged

on bail, he had tried to influence the

witnesses to the case of the prosecution and

therefore, bail granted to the present

applicant was cancelled. The role attributed

to the present applicant for commission of

present offence is very serious in nature.

8. Considering these facts, even if other co-

accused have been granted regular bail, the

case of the present applicant cannot be

considered for bail on the ground of parity.

So far as the aspect of delay in trial is

concerned, the record indicates that the

present applicant and other co-accused

persons have approached this Court by filing

Special Criminal Misc. Application No.1060

of 2023 and other allied matters, whereby

they have challenged the order dated

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.MA/7350/2023 ORDER DATED: 10/11/2023

undefined

07.01.2023 passed by the Learned CBI Court -

2, Ahmedabad in CBI/6/2017, on the ground

that they were not supplied certain

documents. This Court vide order dated

02.02.2023 has directed the learned trial

Court not to proceed with the hearing with

the discharge application and thus, the

trial of the case in question has been

stayed at the instance of present applicant

and other co-accused persons.