Criminal Petition No. 1251 of 2012 · High Court · 2012

3. Learned Special Public Prosecutor for CBI Cases Sri P.Kesava Rao appearing for the petitioner contended that the Laptop contained several details with regard to sale of plots at higher price than the price mentioned in the documents; that the information as to various persons to whom several crores of rupees have been paid, is exclusively within the knowledge of the respondent/A.8; that unless he is interrogated, the information with regard to end users of the money could not be ascertained, and for that purpose, custody of respondent/A.8 is required for interrogation, and hence, he prays to grant police custody of the respondent/A.8 for a period of 15 days under Section 167 (2) Cr.P.C. that all the custodial interrogation of information within

4. On the other hand, Sri Dil Jit Singh Ahluwalia, the respondent/A.8 vehemently learned counsel contended that prior to his arrest, the respondent/A.8 was summoned on several occasions by the CBI and so there is no need respondent/A.8; knowledge of the respondent/A.8 has already been revealed to CBI; that there is apprehension that CBI officials may use third degree methods for extracting the information required by them; that a detailed order has been passed by the learned Special Judge and in the absence of any perverse findings, the order needs no interference by this Court, and hence, he prays to dismiss the criminal petition.

5. Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) registered case RC No.18(A)/2011-CBI-HYD on 17.08.2011 for the offences punishable under Sections 120B read with 420, 409, 477A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and 13 (2) read with 13 (1) (c) and (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The respondent is arrayed as A.8 in the said crime. The reason given by the petitioner/CBI for grant of police custody of the respondent/A.8 is that he was in exclusive knowledge of the excess amount received in cash over and above the documented rate of Rs.5,000/- per square yard towards sale consideration from villa buyers and final beneficiaries of the said excess money need to be ascertained during the course of his examination and that he was found to be non-co- operative with the investigating agency and deliberately evaded his presence before the investigating agency during the course of investigation.

6. The petitioner/CBI registered the case alleging inter alia that A.1 and others entered into a criminal conspiracy with EMMAR properties and some other companies to cheat M/s. APIIC at Hyderabad and other places during the years 2005-2010 and in furtherance of the alleged criminal conspiracy, M/s. EMMAR PJSC entered into agreement with M/s. Stylish Homes Real Estates Private Limited to sell villa plots at a pre-determined price which was less than the market value without the knowledge and consent of M/s. APIIC Board; that A.1 abused his official position by corrupt and illegal means and he knowingly and intentionally did not object to the sale of villa plots at lesser price; that, the Integrated Project consisting of Golf Course, Club House, Boutique Hotel, Township, Convention Centre and Business Hotel, to be developed at Ac.535.00 of land at Manikonda and the leased land at HITEX was awarded to M/s. Emmar In the first instance, the Properties PJSC, Dubai. Vigilance Department conducted enquiry and seized a Laptop relating to the sale transactions whereunder the actual price for which each villa/villa plot was sold. But, as against the market value, price was mentioned as Rs.5,000/- per square yard in the year 2010. It is the further alleged that actual market price of the land is more than Rs.50,000/- per square yard, and that the internal correspondence between the petitioner and some others retrieved from the Laptop of the accused, it is clear that none of the parties submitted any formal applications for allotment of villa plots and thereafter the petitioner obtained letters from the Directors of 10 companies as if the allottees have for cancellation of requested prepared of Understanding Memorandum cancellation letters in the months of November and December, 2010, ante-dating letters of cancellation.

7. The respondent/A.8 was arrested on 28.1.2012 at 8.00 PM in the presence of witnesses. From the material on record, it is prima facie clear that plots/villas have been sold at Rs.5,000/- per square yard whereas the actual amount collected Rs.50,000/- per square yard. Since it is alleged that the the buyers is more respondent/A.8 is in exclusive knowledge of the sale transactions, the final beneficiaries to whom excess money reached need to be ascertained. So, for that purpose, his examination by the petitioner/CBI is very much essential for further progress of investigation. Considering the magnitude and the serious nature of the case, it is desirable to grant police custody of the respondent/A.8 for a period of five days from 04.02.2012 onwards. However, it is made clear that A.8 shall not be compelled to answer the questions which would have tendency to expose him to a criminal charge or penalty or forfeiture.

8. The respondent/A8 is directed to be given to police custody to the petitioner-CBI officials for a period of five days from 04.02.2012 to 08.02.2012 (both days inclusive) from 8.00 AM to 6.00 PM. The Superintendent of the Prison, where the respondent/A8 is in custody, is directed to hand over custody of the respondent/A8 to petitioner- CBI officials everyday at 8.00 AM and the petitioner-CBI officials shall hand over the respondent/A8 to the prison authorities at 6.00 PM. Since it is the apprehension of the respondent/A8 that the CBI officials may resort to third degree methods during interrogation in police custody, it is directed that the respondent/A8 shall be interrogated before his Advocate Sri Dil Jit Singh Ahluwalia or any other advocate authorized by him, and that before handing over the respondent/A8 to the prison authorities, he shall be subjected to examination by a competent Civil Assistant Surgeon and along with his certificate with regard to health condition of the respondent/A8, the respondent/A8 shall be handed over to the concerned prison authorities.

9. The Criminal Petition is, accordingly, allowed. ________________

03.02.2012 DRK (K.C.BHANU, J.) THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 1251 OF 2012 Date: 03.02.2012