Influential Person, Possibility of Tampering Evidence in Corruption Case: Chhattisgarh HC Refuses Anticipatory Bail to Former IAS Officer [Read Order]
The High Court refused anticipatory bail considering the gravity of allegations and the ongoing investigation.
In a recent ruling, the Chhattisgarh High Court refused anticipatory bail to former IAS officer Anil Tuteja in a CBI corruption case, holding that the allegations involved abuse of official position, conspiracy, manipulation of records and possible interference with investigation, and that his earlier influential position could not be ignored at the bail stage.
Anil Tuteja filed his first anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, apprehending arrest in CBI Crime. The case was registered for offences under Sections 182, 211, 193, 195-A, 166-A and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 7, 7A, 8 and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
The matter arose from the Nagarik Apurti Nigam case. The ACB/EOW, Raipur had registered FIR Crime No.09/2015 on 12 February 2015. The applicant was not named in the first charge sheet filed in June 2015, but was later named in a supplementary charge sheet filed in December 2018.
The applicant’s counsel argued that he was a retired IAS officer who had served for 34 years and that multiple FIRs were registered against him by different agencies. He argued that the allegations were politically motivated and that the FIR did not show any specific illegal act or unlawful gain attributable to him.
The counsel also challenged the WhatsApp chats relied upon by the prosecution. His counsel argued that the chats were extracted from devices seized during Income Tax searches but the process of seizure, preservation and extraction suffered from procedural defects. They argued that WhatsApp chats could not by themselves be treated as substantive evidence unless properly proved.
The CBI opposed the bail plea. The CBI’s counsel argued that the allegations were serious and showed a deep-rooted conspiracy involving abuse of official position, interference with investigation, manipulation of official records and attempts to influence proceedings connected with the NAN case and ED proceedings.
The CBI also argued that the investigation was at a crucial stage, searches had been conducted under lawful warrants, incriminating documents had been seized, and several material witnesses were yet to be examined.
The Bench comprising Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal observed that the allegations were grave and related to corruption, conspiracy and misuse of official position. The court observed that issues relating to WhatsApp chats, Section 65B compliance, hash values and chain of custody concern evidentiary value and must be examined during trial, not at the anticipatory bail stage.
The court held that considering the applicant’s earlier influential position, the possibility of interference with investigation or influence over witnesses could not be ruled out at this stage. It dismissed the anticipatory bail application.
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
