Rakesh Ranjan Sinha v. The State Of Bihar Through C.B.I.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.48469 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -26(A) Year- 2013 Thana -C.B.I CASE District- PATNA ====================================================== Rakesh Ranjan Sinha Son of Late Kaushal Kishore Prasad Sinha Resident of Flat No. 301, C.S.D. Apartment, Link Road, Budha Colony, P.S. Budh Colony, District - Patna .... .... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar through C.B.I.

.... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Suraj Narain Pd. Sinha, Sr.Adv. Mr. Naresh Chandra Verma, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Bipin Kumar Sinha (Sc CBI) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL ORDER 04-04-2016 Heard learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, and the learned Standing counsel, appearing on behalf of the C.B.I.

This application for grant of anticipatory bail arises out of Special Case No. 1/2014, arising out of R.C.26(A)/2013, disclosing offences under section 13(2) read with 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

The petitioner holds the post of Superintendent in Central Excise and presently posted in the department of Customs. The case has been instituted against him with the allegation that he is in possession the assets disproportionate to his known sources of income.

Learned Senior counsel, appearing on behalf of the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.48469 of 2015 (9) dt.04-04-2016 petitioner, submits that since charge sheet has already been submitted, no purpose would be served now if he is taken into custody. He further submits that there is no allegation that the petitioner ever attempted to influence the investigation. It has further been submitted that it is purely a dispute over valuation of assets of the petitioner and income earned by him. The valuation of the assets of the petitioner done by the C.B.I. is incorrect and that the petitioner is in a position to explain the source of income and acquisition of assets in his possession, Mr. Sinha, learned Senior counsel submits.

Learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the Central Bureau of Investigation, has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and has submitted that the petitioner could not explain the assets in course of investigation.

Be that as it may, in view of the fact that the charge sheet has been submitted and the allegation against the petitioner is of being in possession the assets disproportionate to his known sources of income, which he can explain during the trial, this application is allowed.

The provisional bail granted to the petitioner vide order dated 29.2.2016 in connection with Special case No. 1/2014 arising out of R.C. 26(A)/2013 pending in the court of Special

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.48469 of 2015 (9) dt.04-04-2016 Judge, C.B.I. II, Patna is, hereby confirmed. (Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J) Surendra/- U