DESH RAJ Vs. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present petition has been filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of regular bail to the petitioner pending trial in case FIR No. RCCHG 2012 ACO 23 dated 18.10.2012, under Sections 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, registered at Police Station CBI, Sector 30, Chandigarh. Brief facts of the case are that CBI registered aforesaid FIR against petitioner-Desh Raj Singh, Superintendent of Police, City Chandigarh on the written complaint of Anokh Singh, Inspector/SHO, Police Station Sector 26, Chandigarh. In his complaint, the complainant has alleged that a departmental enquiry was ordered against him by the Senior Superintendent of Police, U.T., Chandigarh on the basis of are-port of the petitioner being a Superintendent of Police-(City)/Supervisory Officer in connection with FIR No. 230 dated 28.08.2012 and FIR No. 224 dated 18.08.2012 for dereliction of duty, insubordination and not informing senior officers about crime. It is also alleged by the complainant that he was not at fault. In the FIR, it is further alleged that on 05.10.2012 in the evening, petitioner called the Complainant on his Mobile No. 9779580926 from his Mobile No. 9779580905 and asked him to come to his residence at H. No. 114, Sector 23, Chandigarh. As the complainant reached at the house of the petitioner, he discussed about the functioning of complainant's police station and demanded Rs. 5 lacs as bribe for not harassing him and for helping him in the inquiry by deposing in his favour. When the complainant expressed his inability to pay such a huge amount the petitioner allegedly reduced the bribe amount to Rs. 2 lacs. Thereafter, the complainant discussed the matter with a CBI official and told about the demand of bribe. The CBI official told the complainant that demand of bribe is to be verified by way of recording before initiating any action. The petitioner called the complainant to his office on 12.10.2012 and again demanded allegedly bribe of Rs. 2 lacs. The complainant expressed his inability to pay the amount in full. On this, the petitioner allegedly agreed to accept ' One lac as first installment. The complainant further informed the petitioner that he needed a week's time for arranging the bribe amount and the complainant at his own recorded the conversation in his mobile. The complaint was marked to Sh. Kuldeep Singh, Inspector for verification and the verification conducted confirmed the demand of bribe by the petitioner from the complainant. Thereafter, the case was registered and trap was laid at the residence of the petitioner. The petitioner was allegedly caught red handed while demanding and accepting the bribe of ' One lac from the complainant. The said bribe amount was recovered from the drawer of the side table in the camp office of the petitioner. The petitioner was arrested on 18.10.2012 at 9.00 p.m.

(2.) The petitioner has approached this Court for bail as his bail application was declined by the learned Special Judge, CBI Court, Chandigarh vide order dated 08.11.2012.

(3.) On notice of motion, the respondent-CBI has filed reply. Sum and substance of the reply filed to the petition is that the complaint was registered after due verification and thereafter raid was conducted. In pursuance of the raid, the recovery of alleged bribe was effected. The conversations between the petitioner and the complainant were recorded. The complainant recorded his conversations with the petitioner firstly on his mobile. Subsequently, the conversations were recorded on two Soni Digital Voice' Recorders used by the CBI at the pre-trap stage, as well as, during the course of trap. This was done in order to avoid possibility of leakage of information and for that reason shadow witnesses were also not joined. The learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the petitioner is likely to influence the witnesses being a Senior Police Officer and he does not deserve the concession of regular bail in the facts and circumstances of the case.