In Corruption Cases Of Huge Magnitude, A Different Approach Has To Be Adopted While Considering Grant Or Refusal Of Bail: Jammu & Kashmir & Ladakh High Court
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court dismissed the bail application filed by the accused, who were arrested by the CBI in a bribery case.
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that in corruption cases of huge magnitude, a different approach has to be adopted while considering the grant or refusal of bail.
The Court dismissed the bail application under Section 483 of the BNSS filed by the accused, who were arrested by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in a bribery case linked to the Udhampur-Srinagar-Baramulla Rail Link (USBRL) Project. The Court stated that with the “enormous magnitude” of corruption involved, the grant of bail to the accused at the stage was likely to “thwart the course of justice.”
A Single Bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar held, “In the face of the aforesaid observations of the Supreme Court, it is clear that while considering grant or refusal of bail in a corruption case of huge magnitude, a different approach has to be adopted and the mere fact that the offence for which an accused is booked does not carry imprisonment for life or sentence of death does not by itself become a ground for grant of bail to the accused in such cases.”
Senior Advocates Sunil Sethi and Pranav Kohli appeared for the Petitioner, while Senior Additional Advocate General Monika Kohli represented the Respondents.
Brief Facts
The Prosecution alleged that the accused, who was the Chief Engineer with Konkan Railway Corporation Limited (KRCL), in connivance with co-accused, was accepting illegal gratification in exchange for clearing pending bills and revising estimates related to tunnel muck removal.
Court’s Reasoning
The High Court stated, “There is overwhelming material on record of the Case Diary which points towards the involvement of the petitioners in the alleged crime. Thus, by no stretch of reasoning it can be stated that the case against the petitioners is frivolous or based on no material.”
“It is true that severity of punishment that an offence carries is one of the important factors to be considered while granting or refusing bail to an accused, but, the said factor is not the only consideration to be taken into account while dealing with bail application of an accused. Nature and gravity of the charges is an equally important factor which needs to be taken into account by a Court while considering plea for bail of an accused,” the Bench explained.
The Court referred to the decision of the Supreme Court in Devinder Kumar Bansal vs. State of Punjab, wherein it was held that, “presumption of innocence itself cannot be a consideration for grant of bail, emphasized that Court has to balance the cause of the accused and the cause of public justice and that over solicitous homage to accused’s liberty can sometimes defeat the cause of public justice.”
Consequently, the Court held, “Grant of bail to the petitioners, at this stage is, therefore, likely to impact the investigation of the case particularly because Petitioner- Sumit Khajuria is a high ranking officer of the level of Chief Engineer and, as such, has the capacity to influence the witnesses and to tamper with the evidence.”
Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the Bail Application.
Cause Title: Rajesh Kumar Jain v. Central Bureau of Investigation & Ors. (Bail App No 49/2025)
Appearance:
Petitioner: Senior Advocates Sunil Sethi and Pranav Kohli; Advocate Mohsin Bhat, Aftab Malik and Ananya Gupt
Respondents: Senior Additional Advocate General Monika Kohli
