N.K. JAIN Vs. C.B.I.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS application for bail is moved by Shri N.K. Jain, who was earlier working as the Home Secretary, Union Territory, Chandigarh. Initially, an FIR was registered on 6th April, 2000, under Sections 13(1)(1), 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 read with Section 120-B Indian Penal Code. Subsequently, offences under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471, Indian Penal Code, have been added. The basic allegations are that K.B. Goel had been collecting money from various persons whose matters were pending with the Union Territory on behalf of the petitioner.

(2.) K .B. Goel had been placed under suspension by the previous Home Secretary, Anuradha Gupta on the ground that he had distorted facts about the proceedings of the Anomaly Committee for revision of pay scales, thereby causing undue benefits to Laboratory Attendants. When the file was put up before N.K. Jain for appointment of the Inquiry Officer, he dropped the charge sheet by merely issuing a simple warning to K.B. Goel. For this favour, it is alleged that the petitioner had been paid a sum of Rs. 25,000/- by Goel. After reinstatement, K.B. Goel was used as an instrument to collect money from various other persons who were in need of assistance of the Home Secretary. The details of the instances in which the petitioner allegedly collected money can be summarised as follows : (i) N.K. Jain dropped a charge sheet for major penalty against K.B. Goel, Superintendent, by accepting illegal gratification amounting to Rs. 25,000/- from K.B. Goel in July, 1999. (ii) N.K. Jain accepted Rs. 4 lacs from Baljit Singh, Motor Vehicle Inspector in STA, Chandigarh through K.B. Goel, Superintendent, for his posting as Asstt. Secretary and promising to regularise him on the same post during the year 1999. (iii) N.K. Jain promoted Amarjit Singh Driver as Inspector, Weights & Measures, after he agreed to pay Rs. 1 lac and actually paid Rs. 30,000/- in November 1999 through K.B. Goel and demoted him subsequently after he could not pay the balance amount of Rs. 70,000/-. (iv) N.K. Jain reinstated Balbir Singh, a dismissed conductor, CTU, in lieu of receiving Rs. 1 lac as illegal gratification through K.B. Goel in October, 1999. (v) N.K. Jain posted Karma Singh, Superintendent as Sr. Assistant in STA, Chandigarh, after receipt of Rs. 50,000/- from him through K.B. Goel as illegal gratification in July, 1999. (vi) N.K. Jain received illegal gratification amounting to Rs. 1 lac from Jaswant Rai Jain on the assurance that he will help in getting the accused persons arrested and stolen goods recovered/restored in case FIR No. 30 dated 23.2.1996 of P.S. Industrial Area, Chandigarh during the year 1999. Subsequently, K.B. Goel demanded Rs. 3 lacs from Jaswant Rai Jain for helping him in the case but Jaswant Rai Jain refused to pay more money. (vii) N.K. Jain, demanded Rs. 2/- per card from M/s Tata Infotech Ltd., New Delhi for signing the contract pertaining to the computerization of driving licences and registration of vehicles in December, 1999. (viii) N.K. Jain collected Rs. 1 lac each for the selection of 5 clerks and Rs. 1.25 lacs each for the selection of two steno-typists through Sh. K.B. Goel in November/December, 1999. To bring the candidate who had agreed to pay the money on the top of merit list the original type test sheets were removed and were replaced with the type test sheets prepared subsequently. (ix) N.K. Jain issued orders for the posting of Amit Bakshi as Clerk in Education Department in November 1999 by flouting the instructions and various pronouncements of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India that once the selection process is over, for future vacancies fresh applications are to be called to give chance to all the eligible candidates.

(3.) MR . Baldev Singh, learned Senior Advocate, appearing for the petitioner, has submitted that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 18th May, 2000. The period between the registration of the FIR from 6th April, 2000 till 9th May, 2000 was spent by the petitioner knocking on the doors of various Courts to secure anticipatory bail. The matter was taken upto the Supreme Court. Ultimately when the plea for anticipatory bail was dismissed even by the Supreme Court, the petitioner voluntarily surrendered before the CBI on 9th May, 2000. The petitioner remained in CBI custody from 9th May, 2000 to 18th May, 2000. Shri Baldev Singh submitted that inspite of keeping the petitioner in CBI custody for a period of 9 days, nothing incriminating could be recovered either from the petitioner or from his residence. He further submitted that the petitioner having been suspended from service and having been repatriated to his parent State of Haryana is unlikely to influence the prosecution witnesses. He would also not be in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence. In such circumstances, it would be in the fitness of things to grant the concession of bail to the petitioner. In support of his submissions, the learned counsel has relied on a judgment of this Court in Ramesh Sehgal v. State of Haryana, 1997(2) RCR 78. In the aforesaid judgment, this Court observed as under :