ANIL KUMAR MADAN Vs. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this application, the Petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in case RC- DAI-2010-A-0044 for offences under Section 120B read with Sections 420/467/468/471 IPC and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the Petitioner contends that the allegation of the CBI that the Petitioner in conspiracy with M/s Swiss Timing Ltd., Switzerland (in short ,,STL) and M/s AKR Construction Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as ,,AKR) entered into fraudulent contract thereby embezzling Government money is totally unfounded. The Petitioner had no contract whatsoever with either the Organizing Committee (OC) of the Common Wealth Games nor was involved in the Expression of Interest (EOI) or Request for Proposal (RPF). The Petitioner was engaged by STL as a sub-contractor subsequent to an agreement entered into with OC for Timing Scoring Mechanism (TSM). As a matter of fact, there was no conspiracy even between the STL and the two accused named in the FIR as the bid was not finalized by the members of OC named in the FIR but by various Committees. The bid was first shortlisted by a four member Committee at a pre-qualification bid stage. Since the conditions were very stringent and all venues were to be covered simultaneously, only two companies had applied. Thereafter financial bid was approved by the Finance Sub-Committee, which consisted of 12 persons out of which 8 persons were serving IAS officers. None of the members of the Committee have been made as accused. In the contract entered into between the OC and the STL, there is no bar that sub-contractors cannot be engaged for the work. The Petitioners firm M/s Gem International is a sub- contractor, whose contract was entered into much later than the contract between STL and OC. Since the work was enormous, the Petitioner Company further entered into a sub-contract with AKR for civil work of laying the cables. The Petitioners Company raised invoices and STL paid the amount in accordance with the invoices. The Petitioner had received payment only in August, 2010 while the works were going on. LEARNED counsel points out that despite that fact that it had entered into a sub-contract with AKR for laying the cables, however, still there was enormous work, which was technical in nature like presentation, field outlay, precision timing, conducting test events, operation of all installations, transportation of installations from Government warehouses to the venues and thereafter repacking and sending them back, maintaining safety conditions and score board operation plan etc.

(3.) THE ground taken for ill health of the Petitioner is totally unfounded as the documents enclosed show otherwise. As regards the operation of Retina conducted at Switzerland, the doctor in the email addressed to the Petitioner himself has stated that there was no urgency and surgery could be planned according to the professional agenda during the period when the Petitioner was a bit less busy. As regards the ailment that the Petitioner is suffering from Ankylosing Spondylosis, reference is made to the discharge summary of Fortis Escorts dated 23rd January, 2011 which shows that no treatment of Ankylosing Spondylosis was done and the Petitioners complaint at the time was only of snoring chirring sleep, disturbed sleep, recurrent awakening during sleep and choking sensation at night. After examination, the condition of the Petitioner was found to be stable.