Central Bureau Of Investigation Thru. Cbi/Acb Lko. vs Counsel for Applicant(s)

1. Heard Sri Pranjal Krishna, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Anurag Kumar Singh, learned Counsel for the side opposite/CBI and perused the record.

2. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No. RC0062025A0023, under Sections 61(2) of BNS and Section 7, 7A, 8 and 12 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and Substantive offences under Section 7 of PC Act 1988, Police Station-CBI/ACB, Lucknow.

3. The submissions of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely been implicated in the present case.

4. He further submitted that vide order(s) dated 06.11.2025 and 11.11.2025, this Court allowed the Criminal Misc Bail Application No. 10635 of 2025 and Criminal Misc Bail Application No.10962 of 2025, filed by co-accused Adarsh Yogi and Ravi Ranjan and enlarged the co-accused on bail. The relevant paragraph of order dated

06.11.2025 reads as under:- "4. The submissions of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely been implicated in the present case, and the same could be deduced from the fact that the applicant was not named in the FIR as also from the facts indicated in the charge-sheet particularly in paragraph nos. 16.21, 16.23 and 16.25 of the charge- sheet. The referred paragraphs of the charge-sheet are extracted hereinunder:- "16.21 Investigation has revealed that the team members and the independent witnesses observed that three persons were present in the said vehicle. Thereafter, one person wearing full sleeve light colour shirt and dark pant (later identified as Santosh Kumar Jaiswal) came out of the vehicle followed by another person wearing white and blue lining half shirt and jeans with blue backpack on his shoulders (later identified as Gayasuddin Ahmad). Phone call recordings containing call between Ravi Ranjan and Santosh Kumar Jaiswal, collected during investigation, reveal Ravi Ranjan told Santosh Kumar Jaiswal that he is sending someone to fetch him inside and Santosh Kumar Jaiswal should come up to the first floor directly with the bag. Santosh Kumar Jaiswal was seen having conversation with one person of fair complexion wearing light blue half shirt and dark pant (later identified as Adarsh Yogi, Inspector, CBN, Lucknow) near the entry gate of CBN office. Thereafter, Santosh Kumar Jaiswal took the backpack from Gayasuddin Ahmad and followed Aadrsh Yogi, Inspector, CBN inside the CBN office, while 2 BAIL No. 11036 of 2025 Gayasuddin Ahmad stayed back. After sometimes, Santosh Kumar Jaiswal was seen returning without the backpack. He was seen having some conversation with Gayasuddin and thereafter, Gayasuddin Ahmad was seen going inside the CBN office. After few minutes, Gayasuddin Ahmad returned, went up to the aforesaid Tata Nexon vehicle and had conversation with Santosh Kumar Jaiswal. Thereafter, Santosh Kumar Jaiswal, along- with the Sunil Kumar Jaiswal, who was driving the vehicle left in the said vehicle. A team of CBI officers followed the said vehicle of Sunil Kumar Jaiswal.

16.22 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

16.23 Thereafter, accused Ravi Ranjan was intercepted at the ground floor of office of DNC, CBN, Lucknow office, and, he, along with accused Gayasuddin Ahmad, was taken to the office chamber of accused Ravi Ranjan. Thereafter, accused Ravi Ranjan was challenged that he had demanded and accepted undue advantage of Rs. 10,00,000/- from accused Gayasuddin Ahmad, in criminal conspiracy with Mahipal Singh and Aadrsh Yogi, both Inspectors, CBN, Lucknow, for settling the matter/case of Gayasuddin. On which, he became perplexed. Meanwhile, other accused Mahipal Singh, Inspector, CBN was also intercepted and he was challenged regarding the demand and acceptance of undue advantage of Rs. 10,00,000/-, in criminal conspiracy with accused Ravi Ranjan and Aadrsh Yogi, both Inspectors, CBN, Lucknow from Gayasuddin Ahmad for settling the matter/case of Gayasuddin Ahmad. On which, he became perplexed. Thereafter, Adarsh Yogi was intercepted by the CBI team from the office of Sh Rohit Raj, Superintendent (Preventive), CBN Office, Lucknow and he was challenged regarding the demand and acceptance of undue advantage of Rs. 10,00,000/-, in criminal conspiracy with accused Ravi Ranjan and Mahipal Singh, from Gayasuddin Ahmad for settling the matter/case of Gayasuddin Ahmad. On which, he became perplexed.

16.24 XXXXXXXXXXXXXX

16.25 Investigation has revealed that on denial of demand and acceptance of bribe by all the three accused CBN Inspectors namely Ravi Ranjan, Mahipal Singh and Aadrsh Yogi, the search of the common chamber/room of accused Inspectors Ravi Ranjan, Mahipal Singh and Adarsh Yogi of CBN, Lucknow, where they used to sit, was conducted in the presence of independent witnesses and a blue-colored Skybag backpack of Gayasuddin Ahmad containing documents belonging to Gayasuddin, was recovered and seized but alleged bribe amount was found missing. After that, scrutiny of the CCTV camera footages was done, which revealed that Santosh Kumar Jaiswal followed Aadrsh Yogi inside the Preventive Section on the 1st floor of CBN, Lucknow office, where Mahipal Singh and Ravi Ranjan were already present. Santosh Jaiswal was seen leaving the said room without backpack after sometime. No visuals were observed in the CCTV Footage showing removing of the said bribe money of Rs.10 lacs from the said office chamber. Thereafter, a thorough search by the CBI team in the presence of independent witnesses of the said office chamber/ room was once again conducted. During the search, the bribe amount of Rs. 10 lacs was recovered from wall built almirah. The said bribe money was found wrapped in a cloth and which was kept in a cloth file folder bag in obscure manner to prevent detection."

5. The above quoted paragraphs of the charge-sheet reliance has also been placed by learned Counsel for the CBI Sri Anurag Kumar Singh.

6. It is stated by learned Counsel for the applicant that from a bare perusal of the charge- sheet including paragraph nos. 16.21, 16.23 and 16.25, it is apparent that there is no evidence available with the prosecution that Rs. 10,00,000/- was available in sky blue coloured backpack of co-accused Gayasuddin Ahmad and in this view of the matter it would be very difficult for the prosecution to establish it's case before the trial court that Rs. 10,000,00/- was demanded by the co-accused Mahipal Singh and the same was provided by co-accused Gayasuddin Ahmad to the co-accused Mahipal Singh, which according to the case of prosecution was recovered from the wall built almirah of a common chamber/room alleged to be of accused persons.

7. It is further stated that applicant has been implicated with the aid of Section 120B of 3 BAIL No. 11036 of 2025 IPC and there is no evidence to connect the applicant in the offence in issue, as if the story of the prosecution is taken on its face value then the applicant accompanied the co- accused Gayasuddin Ahmad the co-accused Mahipal was the place where present. Prayer is to grant bail to the applicant.

8. It is also stated that charge-sheet has already been filed in the instant case and in this view of the matter there is no possibility of tampering the evidence of the prosecution and it is also stated that applicant is not in a position to influence the prosecution witnesses as all are official witnesses.

1. Heard Sri Pranjal Krishna, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Anurag Kumar Singh, learned Counsel for the side opposite/CBI and perused the record.

2. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No. RC0062025A0023, under Sections 61(2) of BNS and Section 7, 7A, 8 and 12 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and Substantive offences under Section 7 of PC Act 1988, Police Station-CBI/ACB, Lucknow.

3. The submissions of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely been implicated in the present case.

4. He further submitted that vide order(s) dated 06.11.2025 and 11.11.2025, this Court allowed the Criminal Misc Bail Application No. 10635 of 2025 and Criminal Misc Bail Application No.10962 of 2025, filed by co-accused Adarsh Yogi and Ravi Ranjan and enlarged the co-accused on bail. The relevant paragraph of order dated

06.11.2025 reads as under:- "4. The submissions of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely been implicated in the present case, and the same could be deduced from the fact that the applicant was not named in the FIR as also from the facts indicated in the charge-sheet particularly in paragraph nos. 16.21, 16.23 and 16.25 of the charge- sheet. The referred paragraphs of the charge-sheet are extracted hereinunder:- "16.21 Investigation has revealed that the team members and the independent witnesses observed that three persons were present in the said vehicle. Thereafter, one person wearing full sleeve light colour shirt and dark pant (later identified as Santosh Kumar Jaiswal) came out of the vehicle followed by another person wearing white and blue lining half shirt and jeans with blue backpack on his shoulders (later identified as Gayasuddin Ahmad). Phone call recordings containing call between Ravi Ranjan and Santosh Kumar Jaiswal, collected during investigation, reveal Ravi Ranjan told Santosh Kumar Jaiswal that he is sending someone to fetch him inside and Santosh Kumar Jaiswal should come up to the first floor directly with the bag. Santosh Kumar Jaiswal was seen having conversation with one person of fair complexion wearing light blue half shirt and dark pant (later identified as Adarsh Yogi, Inspector, CBN, Lucknow) near the entry gate of CBN office. Thereafter, Santosh Kumar Jaiswal took the backpack from Gayasuddin Ahmad and followed Aadrsh Yogi, Inspector, CBN inside the CBN office, while 2 BAIL No. 11036 of 2025 Gayasuddin Ahmad stayed back. After sometimes, Santosh Kumar Jaiswal was seen returning without the backpack. He was seen having some conversation with Gayasuddin and thereafter, Gayasuddin Ahmad was seen going inside the CBN office. After few minutes, Gayasuddin Ahmad returned, went up to the aforesaid Tata Nexon vehicle and had conversation with Santosh Kumar Jaiswal. Thereafter, Santosh Kumar Jaiswal, along- with the Sunil Kumar Jaiswal, who was driving the vehicle left in the said vehicle. A team of CBI officers followed the said vehicle of Sunil Kumar Jaiswal.

16.22 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

16.23 Thereafter, accused Ravi Ranjan was intercepted at the ground floor of office of DNC, CBN, Lucknow office, and, he, along with accused Gayasuddin Ahmad, was taken to the office chamber of accused Ravi Ranjan. Thereafter, accused Ravi Ranjan was challenged that he had demanded and accepted undue advantage of Rs. 10,00,000/- from accused Gayasuddin Ahmad, in criminal conspiracy with Mahipal Singh and Aadrsh Yogi, both Inspectors, CBN, Lucknow, for settling the matter/case of Gayasuddin. On which, he became perplexed. Meanwhile, other accused Mahipal Singh, Inspector, CBN was also intercepted and he was challenged regarding the demand and acceptance of undue advantage of Rs. 10,00,000/-, in criminal conspiracy with accused Ravi Ranjan and Aadrsh Yogi, both Inspectors, CBN, Lucknow from Gayasuddin Ahmad for settling the matter/case of Gayasuddin Ahmad. On which, he became perplexed. Thereafter, Adarsh Yogi was intercepted by the CBI team from the office of Sh Rohit Raj, Superintendent (Preventive), CBN Office, Lucknow and he was challenged regarding the demand and acceptance of undue advantage of Rs. 10,00,000/-, in criminal conspiracy with accused Ravi Ranjan and Mahipal Singh, from Gayasuddin Ahmad for settling the matter/case of Gayasuddin Ahmad. On which, he became perplexed.

16.24 XXXXXXXXXXXXXX

16.25 Investigation has revealed that on denial of demand and acceptance of bribe by all the three accused CBN Inspectors namely Ravi Ranjan, Mahipal Singh and Aadrsh Yogi, the search of the common chamber/room of accused Inspectors Ravi Ranjan, Mahipal Singh and Adarsh Yogi of CBN, Lucknow, where they used to sit, was conducted in the presence of independent witnesses and a blue-colored Skybag backpack of Gayasuddin Ahmad containing documents belonging to Gayasuddin, was recovered and seized but alleged bribe amount was found missing. After that, scrutiny of the CCTV camera footages was done, which revealed that Santosh Kumar Jaiswal followed Aadrsh Yogi inside the Preventive Section on the 1st floor of CBN, Lucknow office, where Mahipal Singh and Ravi Ranjan were already present. Santosh Jaiswal was seen leaving the said room without backpack after sometime. No visuals were observed in the CCTV Footage showing removing of the said bribe money of Rs.10 lacs from the said office chamber. Thereafter, a thorough search by the CBI team in the presence of independent witnesses of the said office chamber/ room was once again conducted. During the search, the bribe amount of Rs. 10 lacs was recovered from wall built almirah. The said bribe money was found wrapped in a cloth and which was kept in a cloth file folder bag in obscure manner to prevent detection."

5. The above quoted paragraphs of the charge-sheet reliance has also been placed by learned Counsel for the CBI Sri Anurag Kumar Singh.

6. It is stated by learned Counsel for the applicant that from a bare perusal of the charge- sheet including paragraph nos. 16.21, 16.23 and 16.25, it is apparent that there is no evidence available with the prosecution that Rs. 10,00,000/- was available in sky blue coloured backpack of co-accused Gayasuddin Ahmad and in this view of the matter it would be very difficult for the prosecution to establish it's case before the trial court that Rs. 10,000,00/- was demanded by the co-accused Mahipal Singh and the same was provided by co-accused Gayasuddin Ahmad to the co-accused Mahipal Singh, which according to the case of prosecution was recovered from the wall built almirah of a common chamber/room alleged to be of accused persons.

7. It is further stated that applicant has been implicated with the aid of Section 120B of 3 BAIL No. 11036 of 2025 IPC and there is no evidence to connect the applicant in the offence in issue, as if the story of the prosecution is taken on its face value then the applicant accompanied the co- accused Gayasuddin Ahmad the co-accused Mahipal was the place where present. Prayer is to grant bail to the applicant.

8. It is also stated that charge-sheet has already been filed in the instant case and in this view of the matter there is no possibility of tampering the evidence of the prosecution and it is also stated that applicant is not in a position to influence the prosecution witnesses as all are official witnesses.