2013 (5) TMI 920 - SC - Indian Laws

Bail application - Held that - Economic offences constitute a class apart and need to be visited with a different approach in the matter of bail. The economic offence having deep rooted conspiracies and involving huge loss of public funds needs to be viewed seriously and considered as grave offences affecting the economy of the country as a whole and thereby posing serious threat to the financial health of the country. Taking note of all these aspects, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and also with regard to the claim of the CBI and the defence, we are of the opinion that the appellant cannot be released at this stage, however, we direct the CBI to complete the investigation and file charge sheet(s) as early as possible preferably within a period of four months from today. Thereafter, the appellant is free to renew his prayer for bail before the trial Court and if any such petition is filed, the trial Court is free to consider the prayer for bail independently on its own merits without being influenced by dismissal of the present appeal.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Entitlement of the appellant to bail.
2. Nature of the allegations and evidence against the appellant.
3. Status and continuation of the investigation.
4. Impact of economic offences on the public interest and national economy.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Entitlement of the appellant to bail:
The primary issue in this case is whether the appellant has made out a case for bail. The appellant's bail application was previously dismissed by both the trial court and the High Court, which noted the serious nature of the offences, the appellant's personal and financial clout, and the potential for witness tampering. The Supreme Court, after considering the submissions from both sides, concluded that the appellant cannot be released on bail at this stage, directing the CBI to complete the investigation within four months, after which the appellant can renew his bail application.

2. Nature of the allegations and evidence against the appellant:
The appellant is accused of involvement in a serious economic offence, specifically in connection with the VANPIC project, where the Government of Andhra Pradesh allegedly allotted more than 15,000 acres of land to companies promoted by the appellant in violation of laws and norms. In return, the appellant allegedly invested in companies belonging to Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy, son of the then Chief Minister, as a quid pro quo. The CBI claims that the appellant paid illegal gratifications amounting to Rs. 854.50 crores to Jagan Mohan Reddy and his companies. The investigation also revealed that the appellant acted as a conduit to channelize bribe amounts paid by other individuals/companies.

3. Status and continuation of the investigation:
The CBI's status report indicated that the investigation is still ongoing under Section 173(8) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The CBI is examining various aspects, including the appellant's investments in M/s Indus Projects and its group of companies, and the role of other individuals such as A.J. Jagannathan and Dr. Khater Massaad. The investigation has uncovered dubious transactions and the diversion of funds, with significant amounts allegedly misappropriated through fake work orders and hawala channels. The Supreme Court acknowledged the need for further investigation and directed the CBI to expedite the process.

4. Impact of economic offences on the public interest and national economy:
The judgment emphasized the serious repercussions of economic offences on the country's development and financial health. The court noted that economic offences involve deep-rooted conspiracies and significant public fund losses, posing a serious threat to the national economy. The judgment cited the Supreme Court's earlier observation in the State of Gujarat vs. Mohanlal Jitamalji Porwal case, highlighting the community's interest in bringing economic offenders to justice. The court stressed that economic offences should be viewed with a different approach in bail matters, considering the larger interests of the public and the state.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court dismissed the appellant's appeal for bail, directing the CBI to complete the investigation within four months. The appellant can renew his bail application thereafter, and the trial court will consider it independently on its merits. The judgment underscores the gravity of economic offences and the need for a thorough investigation to uphold public interest and national economic integrity.