STATE REP Vs. ANIL SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) This appeal is by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI for short) assailing the pre-arrest order granted by the High Court of Himachal Pradesh in favour of the respondent under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Respondent was a former Minister of the Himachal Pradesh State Government and he held the office for about three years. Besides that, he is a Member of the Legislative Assembly of that State also. His father (Sukhram) was Union Minister for Telecommunications. CBI has been investigating a case against respondent for offence under Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 with the allegation that respondent had amassed wealth far in excess of his known sources of income. While the investigation was in progress respondent approached the High Court of Himachal Pradesh for an order of anticipatory bail. Overruling all the objections raised by the CBI, a learned single Judge of the High Court granted the order subject to the conditions that respondent shall not go abroad without prior permission of the Court, and shall surrender his passport to the CBI etc.

(3.) Accusations made against respondent, as at present, are inter alia, that he had acquired wealth to the tune of Rupees 16,65,000/- as against his known sources of income which could not reach over half of that. CBI further alleges that the assets have been made by the respondent through illegal means and "there is clear-cut evidence pointing to the transfer of assets by Shri Sukhram in the name of his son". According to the CBI, respondents is a clear case of corruption in high places and the order of anticipatory bail should never have been granted in such a case.