2023 (11) TMI 1261 - HC - Indian Laws

Grant of Regular Bail - misappropriation and transfer of money into various shell companies - Hawala transactions - seeking to include the additional conditions in the interim bail order - HELD THAT - It is evident from the record that the petitioner has been shown as an accused one year and ten months after the registration of the crime. The case against him was filed just before his arrest. There is no indication on the record that, during this period of one year and ten months, the petitioner interfered with the investigation. The Prosecution has not made any such claim either. This Court directed the petitioner to abstain from making any public comments relating to the case and from organizing or participating in public rallies and meetings. In the said order, this Court observed that the petitioner holds the position of the National President of Telugu Desam Party and restricting him from appearing before print, electronic media, or any social media platform to make statements or express opinions during his interim bail period affects his fundamental right to freedom of speech. As this Court granted interim bail on medical grounds, this Court thought fit that the petitioner was not supposed to conduct public meetings and rallies. This Court directed the petitioner, while disposing of interim bail application on medical grounds, to place the details about his treatment in a closed cover to the Superintendent, Central Prison, Rajamahendravaram, at the time of his surrender. In view of granting of regular bail, this Court views that a direction can be given to the petitioner to file such medical record before the Special Court, Vijayawada, on or before 28.11.2023. Accordingly, the interim bail granted to the petitioner/A.37 vide common order dated 31.10.2023 is made absolute, and the petitioner/A.37 is ordered to be released on regular bail on the bail bond already furnished by him in respect of this case. However, the condition imposed in respect of his organizing or participating in public rallies and meetings shall stand relaxed from 29.11.2023 onwards. The petitioner/A.37 is directed to produce the medical reports, regarding his treatment, before the Special Court, Vijayawada on or before 28.11.2023 instead of producing the same before the Superintendent, Central Prison, Rajamahendravaram. The remaining conditions imposed in the common order shall be followed by the petitioner/A.37 scrupulously. This Criminal Petition is disposed of.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Regular Bail Application: The petitioner sought regular bail under Sections 437 and 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.).
2. Allegations and Offences: The petitioner was accused of multiple offences under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the Prevention of Corruption Act (PC Act).
3. Prosecution's Case: The prosecution alleged a financial scam involving APSSDC, SIEMENS, and Design Tech.
4. Petitioner's Defence: The petitioner claimed political vendetta and lack of prima facie evidence.
5. Prosecution's Counter: The prosecution argued the gravity of the offence and the need for thorough investigation.
6. Court's Observations and Decision: The court's evaluation of the evidence, health conditions, and legal principles.

Summary:

1. Regular Bail Application:
The petitioner, A.37, sought regular bail under Sections 437 and 439 of the Cr.P.C. in connection with Crime No. 29 of 2021, registered at the CID Police Station, Amaravati, Andhra Pradesh.

2. Allegations and Offences:
The petitioner, along with others, was accused of offences under Sections 166, 167, 418, 420, 465, 468, 471, 409, 201, 109 read with Section 120(B) of the IPC, and Sections 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(c) and (d) of the PC Act.

3. Prosecution's Case:
The prosecution alleged a significant financial scam involving APSSDC, SIEMENS, and Design Tech. The scam was exposed through a tax investigation, revealing that funds allocated to APSSDC were misappropriated and transferred to shell companies. The prosecution contended that the petitioner conspired to manipulate the Skill Development project for personal gain.

4. Petitioner's Defence:
The petitioner, a former Chief Minister and the current Leader of the Opposition, argued that his arrest was politically motivated and aimed at obstructing his campaign for the upcoming State Elections. He claimed there was no prima facie evidence linking him to the alleged offences and emphasized his medical conditions and age as reasons for bail.

5. Prosecution's Counter:
The prosecution argued that economic offences with deep-rooted conspiracies should be viewed seriously. They highlighted the involvement of multiple institutions in uncovering the scam and the need for thorough interrogation to unravel the conspiracy. The prosecution also cited previous Supreme Court judgments emphasizing the gravity of economic offences and the need for stringent measures.

6. Court's Observations and Decision:
The court noted the lack of prima facie evidence linking the petitioner to the alleged misappropriation of funds. It observed that the petitioner was not named in the FIR initially and that other accused individuals had been granted bail. The court emphasized that bail is the rule and jail is the exception, especially for senior citizens with health issues. The court granted regular bail to the petitioner, relaxing certain conditions related to public rallies and meetings from 29.11.2023 onwards. The court directed the petitioner to produce his medical reports before the Special Court, Vijayawada, and noted that the observations made should not be construed as a reflection on the merits of the case.