KAPILABEN PALKESHBHAI PATEL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application has been preferred under section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking anticipatory bail in connection with the first information report being I-C.R. No.21 of 2019 registered with ACB Police Station, Surat, for the offences punishable under sections 7(a) and 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

(2.) Mr. Manoj Danak, learned advocate for the applicant, submitted that the present applicant is actually Corporator of ward no.18 and had been a whistleblower, she had about 25 times filed an application before the Commissioner regarding the illegal construction and construction in violation of bye-laws. Mr. Danak also submitted that the applicant being Corporator of ward no.18, it is her duty to bring to the notice of Municipal Commissioner illegal construction of the builders of that area. Mr. Danak further submitted that the bribe amount came to be recovered, is from some person from the same community of the applicant, may be some distant relative of the applicant, thus, referring to the quantum of punishment under Section 7(a) and 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, he prayed for anticipatory bail.

(3.) Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent - State has opposed grant of anticipatory bail submitting that the fact of being a Corporator or having made an application for about 25 times, would not help the applicant. The offence has been committed and as per the complaint, bribe money of Rs.50,000/- was recovered from accused no.3 thus, it cannot believed that the present applicant being accused no.1 had no knowledge or there would be no demand of bribe money from her side. It was, therefore, prayed that no discretion may be exercised in favour of the applicant.