E-Paper
Custodial questioning needed: CBI court denies bail to 3 in graft case
Special judge denied interim bail to bizman Vikas Goyal, regular his son Raghav Goyal and anticipatory bail to OP Singh Rana, reader to the Punjab VB chief.
Observing that corruption and economic offences required a stricter approach in bail matters and that custodial interrogation was necessary to unearth the “larger conspiracy”, a special CBI court in Chandigarh on Wednesday dismissed the bail pleas of three accused in the ₹13-lakh bribery case.
Through separate orders passed on May 21, special judge Bhawna Jain denied interim bail to businessman Vikas Goyal, regular bail to his son Raghav Goyal and anticipatory bail to OP Singh Rana, reader to the Punjab Vigilance Bureau chief.
The court accepted the CBI’s apprehension that release of the accused at this stage could lead to influencing witnesses, tampering with electronic evidence and obstructing the investigation.
According to the CBI, the case was registered on May 11 on the complaint of a state tax officer posted in Malout, Muktsar. The agency alleged that Vikas Goyal and co-accused Raghav Goyal demanded illegal gratification on behalf of OP Rana and the Punjab Vigilance Bureau chief Sharad Satya Chauhan for allegedly getting a pending complaint against the officer closed.
The CBI said during trap proceedings on May 11, co-accused Ankit Wadhwa accepted ₹13 lakh and a Samsung Galaxy Z Fold-7 mobile phone from the complainant on the directions of Raghav Goyal. The cash and mobile phone were recovered from Wadhwa, following which Vikas Goyal and Raghav Goyal were arrested on May 12.
While rejecting Rana’s anticipatory bail plea, the court observed that WhatsApp chats and digital communication between Rana and co-accused Raghav Goyal prima facie suggested his active involvement in the conspiracy.
The court noted that custodial interrogation was necessary for recovery of electronic devices, deleted chats, cloud data and to identify other possible beneficiaries in the alleged racket.
The court also took note of the CBI’s claim that Rana, despite officially being attached as reader to ADGP (Traffic), allegedly continued functioning as reader to the Punjab vigilance chief without any formal posting order. It further noted that he had been placed under suspension on May 18.
Advocate Harsh Mohan Singh, counsel for Rana, also moved an application seeking directions to the CBI to collect and preserve CCTV footage from two commercial establishments in Chandigarh, claiming the recordings of May 11 could help establish the applicant’s innocence.
In Vikas Goyal’s case, the court rejected his plea for one-month interim bail on medical grounds, observing that he was already receiving treatment at GMCH, Sector 32, Chandigarh, and no material had been placed on record to show that adequate treatment could not be provided through government medical facilities.
