Court refuses to discharge ex-CBFC member in bribery case linked to former CEO

Special CBI judge AV Gujarathi held that no prior government sanction was required to prosecute the accused as he had ceased to be a public servant when the court took cognisance of the case

MUMBAI: A special Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) court has rejected the discharge plea of former Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) advisory panel member Sarvesh Ramchandra Jaiswal, one of the accused in a 2014 bribery case in which Rakeshkumar Niti Singh, then chief executive officer of CBFC Mumbai, was allegedly caught accepting a bribe of ₹70,000 to clear a regional film expeditiously.

Court refuses to discharge ex-CBFC member in bribery case linked to former CEO

Special CBI judge AV Gujarathi held that no prior government sanction was required to prosecute Jaiswal as he had ceased to be a public servant when the court took cognisance of the case in July 2016, nearly two years after his removal from the advisory panel.

According to the prosecution, Singh, Jaiswal and agent Shripati Mishra had conspired to demand money for issuing censor certificates, with Singh seeking ₹70,000 through Mishra to clear the Chhattisgarhi film ‘Mor Dauki Ke Bihav’ before its scheduled release on August 15, 2014. The CBI laid a trap on August 14, 2014, based on a complaint by film representative Pravin Mohare, during which Singh was allegedly caught red-handed accepting the bribe routed through Mishra.

Investigators also claimed that Mishra had earlier accepted an iPad and a laptop for securing quick certification for another film, and that Singh routinely demanded between ₹2,000 and ₹10,000 to expedite approvals; one witness claimed he had paid ₹1.5-2 lakh to Singh over time.

Jaiswal sought discharge on the ground that the prosecution lacked the mandatory sanction required to proceed against a public servant under the Prevention of Corruption Act.

The court, however, rejected the contention, noting that he had been removed from the advisory panel in August 2014 and therefore did not enjoy the statutory protection available to serving officials.

Relying on relevant Supreme Court judgements, the court held that sanction was not required for prosecuting an individual who had retired or otherwise ceased to hold the office that was allegedly misused.

The ruling follows the court’s refusal in February this year to discharge Singh, who faces allegations of systematically soliciting money or electronic gadgets in exchange for clearing films quickly. The case, pending since 2014, will now proceed to the next stage of trial.