Vijay Prasad Mehta @ Bijay Prasad ... vs The State Through Acb
2023 Latest Caselaw 3203 Jhar

       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                          B.A. No. 5822 of 2023

Vijay Prasad Mehta @ Bijay Prasad Mehta                            ... Petitioner
                                -Versus-
The State through ACB                ...                            ... Opposite Party

       CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RATNAKER BHENGRA

           For the Petitioner :- Mr. Mahesh Tewari, Advocate;
                                 Mr. Shekhar Prasad Gupta, Advocate
           For the State      :- Mrs. Priya Shrestha, Spl.P.P.

                                          ...

07/28.08.2023: Both the counsels have appeared.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has initially submitted that the petitioner is a government employee and that the petitioner has been wrongly implicated in this case on alleged misconduct. The learned counsel has further submitted that the material evidence available on record suggests that the petitioner has committed offence under section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (as amended in 2018). The learned counsel has further submitted that the charge-sheet has already been submitted on 28.07.2023 but the cognizance has not been taken till date and the petitioner is in custody since 01.06.2023. The learned counsel has further submitted that in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in "Sanjay Chandra v. CBI" (2012) 1 SCC 40, the petitioner may be granted privilege of bail. The learned counsel has further submitted that till date no sanction has been taken, which is mandatory and that the submission of charge-sheet without sanction is completely illegal.

The learned counsel for the State has, on the other hand, submitted that in this case as per section 20 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, there is presumption of guilt, therefore, bail should not be granted. Moreover, the learned counsel for the State has submitted that the case, which has been cited, is not applicable and it is not for section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act and that the case that has been cited relates to forgery and moreover, in the current case, the petitioner was caught red-handed with money.

In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, put up this case on 04.09.2023.

S.B.                                                     (Ratnaker Bhengra, J.)