Court denies pre-arrest bail to CGST official in bribery case

Mumbai: The special Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) court on Tuesday rejected the anticipatory bail plea of a superintendent of anti-evasion unit of Central Goods and Service Tax (CGST) booked for allegedly demanding ₹1 crore from a gold trader

Mumbai: The special Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) court on Tuesday rejected the anticipatory bail plea of a superintendent of anti-evasion unit of Central Goods and Service Tax (CGST) booked for allegedly demanding ₹1 crore from a gold trader.

HT Image

As per the case, Dhirendra Kumar, was posted in the tax evasion department of the CGST Commissionerate office at Churchgate.

On April 20, Jitendra Lunawat, resident of Kandivali, had filed a complaint against Kumar for demanding a bribe of ₹1 crore for not arresting the complainant’s friend Arpit Jagertiya, who runs Shree Bullions, under the charge of tax evasion.

Lunawat claimed that Jagertiya had called him to arrange money to pay Kumar, failing which he would be arrested.

It was claimed that after negotiation the demand was reduced to ₹50 lakh, of which, ₹25 lakh was to be paid the same day and the remaining amount was to be paid the next day to Amritlal Sankhla, owner of Mukesh Jewellers, on instruction of Kumar, on instructions of Kumar.

Based on the complaint, the CBI laid a trap. On April 21, at around 1.30 am, when the complainant went to deliver the money, the jeweller’s man took the amount and escaped before the CBI officials could catch them. The agency then relied on CCTV footage of the trap.

Kumar in his defence pleaded that he was falsely implicated as he was probing some suspicious transactions. He further claimed that there was nothing on record to show that the applicant either demanded any bribe, nor anything to show that he accepted any bribe.

Opposing the plea, the CBI said Kumar has been absconding since the complainant delivered the bribe amount.

The agency claimed that Sankhla was arrested on May 10 and the document recovered from him showed that Sankhla was involved in collecting bribes for Kumar and also for other officers for several instances.

The court observed that prima facie it is established that Kumar has taken bribe. “Siphoning and diversion of the funds and fund trail is necessary to be ascertained and unearthed. Antecedents of the accused are not unblemished. Custodial interrogation of the applicant/accused is warranted,” the court said, while rejecting Kumar’s plea.