SUNIL JADHAV Vs. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner who is arraigned as accused No.3 in R.C.No.10(A)/2016 of CBI/ACB/BLR, Bengaluru for the offences punishable under Sections 7, 9, 13(2) r/w. Section 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

(2.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is not a Government Servant and is employee of a private concern. The gist of the allegations against the petitioner is that, he has acted as a facilitator for receiving the bribe amount on behalf of accused Nos.1 and 2. In fact, it is the allegation of the prosecution that the petitioner has admitted the receipt of the amount on the instructions of accused No.2.

(3.) This Court by its order dated 24.05.2016 in Crl.P.No.3376/2016, has been pleased to enlarge accused No.1 on bail. In view of the same and following the principles of parity, the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail. However, it is made clear that the observations made herein are for the purpose of considering the bail petition only and the Trial Court shall remain uninfluenced by the observations made in this case.