Order 5

Order Details: COPY OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
Pdf Text: CC No. 259/2024
CBI Vs. Rajnesh Singh Bisht & ors.
CNR No. DLCT11-000262-2024
21.05.2024
Present: Sh. A.K. Tanwar, Ld. Sr.PP for CBI.
A-1 Rajnesh Singh Bisht with Sh. Manish Chauhan,
Ld. Counsel.
A-2 Ram Chander Joshi with Sh. Subham
Goswami, Ld. Counsel.
Separate applications seeking bail by both the
accused persons have been moved through their Ld. respective
counsels on the ground that FIR has been registered on a false
complaint and accused have nothing to do with the commission
of offence as alleged in the FIR. It is further stated that
investigation has already been completed and charge sheet has
already been filed without arrest of the accused persons and
they are no more required for interrogation in the present case.
It is stated that the accused persons are having clean antecedents
and are not previous convict and are ready to abide by all the
condition imposed by this court for granting bail.
Bail applications have been strongly opposed by
the Ld. Sr. PP for CBI stating that they may hamper with the
evidence or may flee from justice, if released on bail.
Arguments heard. Record perused. It is a matter of
record that charge sheet has been filed without arrest of the
accused persons. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
case that accused were not arrested during the investigation. No
adverse report against accused persons even after filing of the
charge sheet, till date has been filed on behalf of CBI. In these
-- 1 of 6 --
circumstances, both accused are admitted to bail subject for
furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- (One
Lakh) with one surety each in the like amount. It is further
directed that none of the accused will temper with the evidence
in any manner nor try to contact the witnesses and will not leave
the country without the permission of the court. They will furnish
their mobile number(s) to the IO/HIO and shall keep the same in
on condition.
It is stated on behalf of Ld. Sr. PP that as
compliance of Section 207 Cr.P.C. has been done and all
documents have been supplied, therefore, if accused persons
have no objection, then arguments on charge may be heard today
itself. Accused persons and their counsels have no objection in
this regard. Let arguments on charge be heard.
It is submitted on behalf of prosecution that FIR was
registered on the complaint of DIG (Vig.) BSF, CGO Complex
Lodhi Road against accused Rajnesh Singh Bisht
Constable/Peon, FHQ, BSF, New Delhi and other unknown
public servants/private persons. During investigation, it is
established that Rajnesh Singh Bisht conspired with other
accused namely Ram Chandra Joshi, Head Constable at 185
Battalion, BSF to obtain bribe from different BSF personal for
getting them transferred to their desired places by exercising the
personal influence of Rajnesh Singh Bisht with the concerned
officials of BSF responsible for the transfer/posting of BSF
personal. In pursuance to the said conspiracy the Ram Chandra
Joshi contacted various such needy BSF officials and
recommended the name of Rajnesh Singh Bisht for getting their
-- 2 of 6 --
transferred and for that purpose Ram Chandra Joshi shared the
telephone number of Rajnesh Singh Bisht with such BSF
personal. During investigation the IO has examined various such
BSF personal who on demand made by accused Rajnesh Singh
Bisht and in pursuance of the recommendation made by accused
Ram Chandra Joshi contacted Rajnesh Singh Bisht and on
demand gave bribe amount of different amount demanded by
Rajnesh Singh Bisht from late 2018 to Feb. 2021 and as such
Rajnesh Singh Bisht took bribe from 23 personal amounting to
Rs.4,62,000/- which he received in his bank account No.
10453590204 either through UPI or through cash deposit. The
enquiry conducted by BSF officer also established the role of
Rajnesh Singh Bisht and there are evidence on record by way of
recording of Rajnesh Singh Bisht with some of the staff who
gave bribe to Rajnesh Singh Bisht whereby the demand and
acceptance are confirmed. Besides this there are oral evidence
of such BSF personal who gave bribe to accused Rajnesh Singh
Bisht on his demand.
Since the evidence on record prima facie shows
commission of offence under Section 120-B IPC read with
Section 7-A of P. C. Act, 1988 (as amended upto 2018) with
substantive offence under Section 7-A of P. C. Act on part of
accused Rajnesh Singh Bisht and offences under Section 120-B
read with Section 7-A of P. C. Act, 1988 (as amended upto 2018)
on the part of Ram Chandra Joshi. As per Section 19 of P. C. Act,
no sanction is required for prosecution under Section 7-A of P. C.
Act.
On behalf of A-1 & A-2 it is submitted that all the
-- 3 of 6 --
allegations against accused persons are false and present case has
been planted upon them by CBI and they have been falsely
implicated in this case. Testimony of all the witnesses are
motivated and recorded by CBI with ulterior motive in order to
frame both the accused persons in false case. No other
submissions are made on behalf of accused persons and their
counsels.
Arguments heard. Record perused. The facts of the case as
reflected from the submissions made by Ld. Prosecutor are not
repeated here for the sake of brevity. As per record there are
testimonies of various BSF personal who are said to be aggrieved
by the illegal demand made by accused Rajnesh Singh Bisht
through accused Ram Chandra Joshi as they have been assuring
them that they have acquaintance with higher up officials and
can very well arrange their posting and transfer of their choice.
In this regard the bank details of accused Rajnesh Singh Bisht
are filed on record along with the charge sheet which reflect the
transfer of money which was illegally demanded as gratification
by accused Rajesh Singh Bisht through accused Ram Chandra
Joshi as well as by himself. Testimonies of various witnesses
confirming the fact under Section 161 Cr.P.C. have been
recorded.
It is further reflected from the record that higher BSF
officials, after receiving complaint against above named accused
persons had conducted enquiry in order to verify the veracity of
illegal demand made by accused Rajesh Singh Bisht through
accused Ram Chandra Joshi and the said enquiry report has been
filed along with the charge sheet which further testify prima facie
-- 4 of 6 --
that the fact mentioned in the complaint Rajesh Singh Bisht and
accused Ram Chandra Joshi stands corrected and verified.
Another material piece of evidence prima facie, available
against accused persons filed along with the charge sheet is
recorded conversation of accused persons with some of the
prosecution witnesses has been filed along with the charge sheet.
Transcript of recorded conversation has also been filed on record
which has been verified during enquiry conducted by BSF
officials against accused persons.
At the out set it is important to mention here that in order
to frame charge against the accused persons, court is not
required to examine the veracity of all the witnesses in such a
way that it leads to conviction of the accused persons. What the
court has to see at this stage is whether a strong prima facie case
is made out against the accused persons supported with relevant
material evidence. In this regard reference can be made At this
stage, reference can be laid upon judgment passed by Hon’ble
Supreme Court of India in case titled as “
Union of India Vs.
Prafulla Kumar Samal & Anr.”, 1979 AIR 366 as under that:
“
The words 'not sufficient ground for
proceeding against the accused' clearly show
that the Judge is not a mere post office to
frame the charge at the behest of the
prosecution, but has to exercise his judicial
mind to the facts of the case in order to
determine whether a case for trial has been
made out by the prosecution. In assessing
this fact, it is not A necessary for the court to
enter into the pros and cons of the matter or
into a weighing and balancing of evidence
and probabilities which is really his function
after the trial starts. At the stage of section
-- 5 of 6 --
227, the Judge has merely to sift the
evidence in order to find out whether or not
there is sufficient ground for proceeding
against the accused. The sufficiency of
ground would take within its fold the nature
of the evidence recorded by the police or the
documents produced before the court which
ex facie disclose that there are suspicious
circumstances against the accused so as to
frame a charge against him.”
In the light of above discussion, it is, therefore, reflected
that sufficient prima facie material is available against both the
accused persons in order to frame charge under Section 120-B
IPC and Section 7-A P. C. Act 1988 (as amended upto 2018).
Therefore, charge under Section under Section 120-B IPC read
with Section 7-A of P. C. Act, 1988 (as amended upto 2018)
with substantive offence under Section 7-A of P. C. Act against
accused Rajnesh Singh Bisht and offences under Section 120-B
read with Section 7-A of P. C. Act, 1988 (as amended upto 2018)
against Ram Chandra Joshi. As per Section 19 of P. C. Act be
framed.
Charges framed separately against the accused persons to
which accused persons pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
Be put up for PE on 24.05.2024. Let witnesses be
summoned.
(PRASHANT KUMAR)
Special Judge (PC Act) (CBI)-07
Rouse Avenue Courts: New Delhi
21.05.2024
-- 6 of 6 --