The single judge bench of the Jharkhand High Court held that even in spite of the issuance of notice under Section 41-A, there is no appearance of the accused persons, and then, the question of hindrance in the investigation will be there.
Brief facts
The factual matrix of the case is that the information received from the reliable source that the Petitioner amassed huge assets which are disproportionate to his known sources of income to the tune of Rs.71,09,612/- approx. and acquisition of the same is not likely to be accounted for satisfactorily by him. The FIR was registered for the offenses under Sections 13(2) read with 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Therefore, the present pre-arrest bail application is filed.
Contentions of the Petitioner
The Petitioner submitted that the charge sheet has already been filed and the court also has taken cognizance. It was furthermore submitted that even the Coordinate Bench of this Court has restrained the prosecuting agency from taking any coercive action. The Petitioner relied upon the judgment titled Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation.
Observations of the court
The Hon’ble Court observed that the requirement under the Code of Criminal Procedure is to issue notice under Section 41-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure if the offense falls under Part A and if the punishment is less than seven years. This will fulfill the objective of having the accused persons appear during the investigation. The situation would have been different if the accused individuals had not shown up despite the notice being sent under Section 41-A, in which case the issue of hindrance to the investigation would have arisen.
The court noted that the charge sheet has already been submitted and there exists no complaint whatsoever on behalf of the prosecuting agency of non-cooperation by both the petitioners.
Based on these considerations, the court granted the pre arrest bail to the Petitioner.
The decision of the court
With the above direction, the court allowed the application.
Case title: Prashant Kumar Sinha V. Union of India through C.B.I.
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sujit Narayan Prasad
Case No.: A.B.A. No. 4511 of 2022
Advocates for the Petitioner: Mr. Ajay Kumar Sah, Advocate Mr. Amitabh Prasad, Advocate
Advocate for the State: Ms. Chandana Kumari, A.C. to A.S.G.I
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :
