1 2025:CGHC:51749 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8349 of 2025 Kunal Anand S/o Shri Anand Kumar Jha Aged About 47 Years R/o Flat No. A-703, Symphony Apartments, Kadru Road, Near Shahjanand Chowk, Hamru Housing Colony, Distt. Ranchi, Jharkhand 834002 ... Applicant versus Central Bureau of Investigation Through Superintendent of Police, Central Bureau of Investigation, AC-II, New Delhi Camp At Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ... Non-Applicant (Cause Title taken from Case Information System) For Applicant : Mr. Sunil Kumar, Advocate For Non-Applicant : Mr. B. Gopa Kumar, Advocate Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 16/10/2025 1. This is the third bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. RC2172025A0010 registered at Police Station, Central Bureau of Investigation AC-II, New Delhi Camp at Bilaspur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections ROHIT KUMAR CHANDRA Digitally signed by ROHIT KUMAR CHANDRA 2 7,8,9,10,12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and 61(2), BNS 2023. 2. The first bail application filed by the applicant being MCRC No. 3766 of 2025 was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 13.05.2025, however, the applicant was granted interim bail for a period of one month on the humanitarian ground that his minor son was suffering from blood cancer and thereafter, the applicant surrendered before the concerned trial Court on 15.06.2025 upon the expiry of the period of parole/ short-term bail of one month granted to him. 3. The second bail application filed by the applicant being MCRC No. 5150 of 2025 was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 23.07.2025, however, the applicant was granted interim bail for a period of two months on the similar ground that his son was suffering from blood cancer and the applicant has surrendered before the concerned trial Court on 25.09.2025 upon the expiry of the period of parole/ short-term bail of two months granted to him. Thereafter, the applicant has moved an application before this Court with a prayer for extension of interim bail order dated 23.07.2025 preferred by the applicant in CRMP No. 3010 of 2025, which was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 26.09.2025 for want of prosecution. Hence, this third bail application. 4. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that, on 25.04.2025, the applicant was caught receiving a bribe of Rs. 31,93,500/- from 3 Mr.Manoj Pathak (employee of M/s Jhajharia Nirman Ltd.) on behalf of his brother Mr. Vishal Anand, Chief Engineer, RSW, SECR, Bilaspur at Birsa Chowk, Ranchi, Jharkhand. Therefore, the aforesaid offence has been registered against him. 5. I.A. No. 02 of 2025 is an application for ad-interim bail on the ground that the applicant’s son, aged 13 years, has been diagnosed with Blood Cancer and is presently undergoing treatment at Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, under the care of specialist doctors. His treatment commenced on 05.05.2025 and is continuing regularly. Recently, on 13.08.2025 and 17.09.2025, he attended follow up sessions and he has now been directed to reappear on 08.10.2025 for further treatment, including necessary tests, therapy and medication. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant’s son, aged about 13 years, has been diagnosed with blood cancer for which his treatment commenced on 05.05.2025 and is continuing regularly. Recently, on 13.08.2025 and 17.09.2025, he attended follow up sessions and he has now been directed to reappear on 08.10.2025 for further treatment, including necessary tests, therapy and medication. He further submitted that this Hon’ble Court has, on earlier occasions, been pleased to grant ad-interim bail to the applicant on humanitarian/medical grounds, first for a period of one month on 15.05.2025 and thereafter for a further period of two months on 23.07.2025 to enable him to provide treatment to his only minor son. He also submitted that on both 4 occasions, the applicant has scrupulously complied with all conditions of interim bail and has not, in any manner, misused the liberty granted to him. He has duly surrendered before the learned trial Court with the stipulated time on both the occasions, therefore, he prayed for grant of ad-interim bail. 7. So far as merits of the case is concerned, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the impugned order dated 24.06.2025 passed by the learned Special Judge, CBI, Raipur, whereby the bail application of the applicant has been rejected, is ex facie illegal, arbitrary and unsustainable in law. The applicant is a respectable businessman working since the year 2000 and deep roots in society. He has no concern whatsoever with the alleged offence and has been falsely implicated in the present case and the applicant has been illegally apprehended on unfounded and concocted allegations of having planted the alleged recovered money, which are wholly baseless, malicious and devoid of substance. He further submitted that the Investigating Agency concluded the investigation and has already filed the charge- sheet on 23.06.2025. A a bare perusal of the charge-sheet reveals glaring contradictions and inherent improbabilities in the prosecution's case, casting serious doubt on the veracity of the allegations against the applicant. He also submitted that the prosecution has relied on telephonic interceptions conducted without compliance with the procedural safeguards under the Telecommunications Act, 2023, rendering such evidence 5 inadmissible and vitiating the investigation. He contended that the applicant has already undergone substantial pre-trial incarceration, as he was arrested on 25.04.2025, he has no previous criminal antecedent, the investigation is substantially complete, the charge-sheet has already been filed and cognizance has also been taken by the learned Special Judge and the trial has not yet been commenced, and in the present case, the trial is likely to be prolonged, and no specific timeline has been indicated for its commencement or conclusion, therefore, the applicant’s continued detention would effectively amount to punishment without trial, which is constitutionally impermissible and contrary to the binding dicta of the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 8. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for respondent / UOI would opposed the bail application and submitted that the applicant was caught red handed receiving a bribe of Rs.31,93,500/- from Mr.Manoj Pathak (employee of M/s Jhajharia Nirman Ltd.) on behalf of his brother Mr. Vishal Anand, Chief Engineer, RSW, SECR, Bilaspur at Birsa Chowk, Ranchi, Jharkhand and the applicant has not been able to explain why he was receiving such a large and substantial sum from Mr. Manoj Pathak. The applicant/accused has also not been able to explain what business or other transaction existed between him and Mr.Manoj Pathak that led to this amount being given to him. The crimes committed by the applicant in respect of which the charge 6 sheet has been filed are economic crimes, therefore, his bail application is liable to be dismissed. 9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 10. From perusal of the FIR as well as charge-sheet and materials brought on record it transpires that the applicant was caught red handed receiving a bribe of Rs.31,93,500/- from Mr. Manoj Pathak (employee of M/s Jhajharia Nirman Ltd.) on behalf of his brother Mr. Vishal Anand, Chief Engineer, RSW, SECR, Bilaspur at Birsa Chowk, Ranchi, Jharkhand and the applicant has not been able to explain why he was receiving such a large and substantial sum from Mr. Manoj Pathak. The applicant/accused has also not been able to explain what business or other transaction existed between him and Mr. Manoj Pathak that led to this amount being given to him. The crimes committed by the applicant in respect of which the charge sheet has been filed are economic crimes. Granting bail in such serious cases is likely to embolden those involved in such crimes. This also has a negative impact on the society. It is not in dispute that the minor son of the applicant is suffering from Blood Cancer and his treatment is going on under the supervisions of expert doctors. Considering the aforesaid fact, on the humanitarian ground, this Court, on earlier occasions, has already granted ad-interim bail to the applicant, firstly for a period of one month on 15.05.2025 and thereafter for a further period of two months on 23.07.2025 to enable him to provide 7 treatment to his only minor son. However, considering the fact that the applicant was caught red handed taking bribe of huge amount and further considering the nature and gravity of the offence, this Court does not find it to be a fit case for grant of bail at this stage. 11. Accordingly, the third bail application of applicant- Kunal Anand, involved in Crime No. RC2172025A0010 registered at Police Station, Central Bureau of Investigation AC-II, New Delhi Camp at Bilaspur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 7,8,9,10,12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and 61(2), BNS 2023, is rejected, at this stage. 12. Consequently, I.A. No. 02/2025 also stands rejected. 13. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 14. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Dey/Chandra