The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has registered an FIR against a Kolkata-based businessman, Amit Agrawal, and officials of Kolkata Police, for allegedly lodging a false case against a Ranchi-based lawyer, Rajeev Kumar, representing a petitioner in two PILs seeking CBI and ED probes against Jharkhand chief minister Hemant Soren in Jharkhand high court.
The FIR was filed after conducting a preliminary inquiry on the direction of the Jharkhand high court on November 30. Besides Agrawal, the central agency named ”unknown officials of Kolkata Police” and “unknown others” as accused in the FIR, registered in Delhi, according to agency officials.
Agrawal on July 31 last year filed a case with Hare Street police station in Kolkata against Rajeev Kumar and Shiv Shankar Sharma, the petitioner in the two PILs against Soren. The complaint was that Kumar demanded a bribe of ₹10 crore for getting a PIL against a local business dismissed in Jharkhand high court.
Kumar was arrested by Kolkata Police on the same day while receiving ₹50 lakh from Agrawal.
CBI in its FIR said that it was entrapment and that Agrawal used the services of another person, Sonu Agrawal, to trap the lawyer.
“…Enquiry further revealed that the information provided by Amit Agrawal to Hare Street police station was false and the bribe was given to Rajeev Kumar by alluring him with an intention to interfere with the judicial process. Contrary to the allegations made in the complaint to the Hare Street PS, it was Amit Agrawal who called Rajeev Kumar to Kolkata through Sonu Agrawal and offered him money. Further, the conversation (with Rajeev Kumar) recorded by Agrawal also does not reveal any threat for extortion from Rajeev Kumar,” CBI said in its preliminary enquiry (PE), based on which the FIR was registered on January 18.
{{/usCountry}}“…Enquiry further revealed that the information provided by Amit Agrawal to Hare Street police station was false and the bribe was given to Rajeev Kumar by alluring him with an intention to interfere with the judicial process. Contrary to the allegations made in the complaint to the Hare Street PS, it was Amit Agrawal who called Rajeev Kumar to Kolkata through Sonu Agrawal and offered him money. Further, the conversation (with Rajeev Kumar) recorded by Agrawal also does not reveal any threat for extortion from Rajeev Kumar,” CBI said in its preliminary enquiry (PE), based on which the FIR was registered on January 18.
{{/usCountry}}It added that “Amit Agrawal had called Rajeev Kumar to Kolkata and offered and gave him ₹50 lakhs to induce public servant to get the PIL dismissed.”
CBI also alleged that Agrawal, in March 2022, tried to influence the lawyer in connection with the PILs against Soren through the then Ranchi deputy commissioner.
Sharma, represented by Kumar, filed two PILs in October 2021 and February 2022,seeking prosecution of Soren for owning a mining lease (which is a violation of the office of profit legislation) and sought a CBI and ED investigation into alleged money laundering by Soren’s family through shell companies operated by Agarwal and others.
While the Jharkhand high court termed the two PILs maintainable, the Supreme Court set aside the order on November 7 last year due to lack of ”credentials” of the petitioner and allegations based on ”half-baked” truth.
By then, ED had recorded an enforcement complaint information report (ECIR) on August 10, 2022, using the Hare Street police station FIR as predicate offence, and launched a money laundering investigation, making both Agrawal and Kumar accused in the case. Subsequently, both Kumar and Agrawal were arrested in the case. Both are currently out on bail.
In its first prosecution complaint filed before the special PMLA court in Ranchi on October 14, ED too said it was Agrawal who lured Kumar into taking the money.
Agrawal moved the Jharkhand high court on October 18, seeking quashing of the ECIR filed by ED and terming his detention wrongful and illegal. He also pleaded for an independent inquiry by an SIT headed by a retired Supreme Court or high court judge into the ECIR, alleging that the case against him was an attempt to divert the investigation and save the accused in the Hare Street case.
Disposing the petition, the bench of justice Sanjay Dwivedi rejected the first two pleas, while the court allowed the third prayer (of an independent inquiry) of the petitioner and directed CBI to conduct a preliminary enquiry in two weeks.
Based on the PE, CBI on January 18 registered the case and also conducted searches at locations connected with Agrawal in West Bengal and Jharkhand on January 19, the officials cited in the first instance said.