SANDHIR AGARWAL Vs. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner in the CRM dated October 27, 2014 in custody from August 23, 2014 in connection with CBI Special Case RC 04/S/2014, CBI, SPE, SCB, SIT, Kolkata under ss.420/409/406/120B IPC is seeking bail under s.439 Cr.P.C.

(2.) The petitioners a previous s.439 bail prayer was rejected by this court on September 25, 2014 in CRM No.14434 of 2014. Mr. Mitra appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the changed circumstances are filing of the charge -sheet on November 17, 2014 and a considerable longer period of detention.

(3.) Mr. Mitra has submitted as follows. After arrest the petitioner was taken to police custody on more than one occasion. After custodial interrogation the investigating agency prayed for his judicial custody. Hence from September 1, 2014 he is in judicial custody and since then there has been no further interrogation. The principal accused in the case was granted statutory bail. He was facing accusation of cheating a large number of poor investors. There was no accusation that the petitioner had cheated the investors, or induced the investors to invest with the private Saradha concern, or misappropriated the invested money. The accusation rather was that he had assured the principal accused of managing SEBI and RBI. The SEBI had rejected approval to the scheme in 2013. The accusations were wild. There was no accusation of loss of State money or commission of any economic offence. The arrest itself, having been made without any reason, was wrongful. The petitioner is being detained in custody as a punitive measure, not because his further detention is necessary. The principles stated in Sanjay Chandra v. CBI, (2012) 1 SCC 40 are squarely applicable to the case. Article 21 entitles the petitioner to bail on any condition the court thinks appropriate. The CBI has been making baseless wild allegations against the petitioner.