The Punjab and Haryana High Court has clarified that anticipatory bail in corruption-related offences can only be granted under rare and exceptional circumstances. The court emphasized that such relief is only justified when the FIR shows prima facie signs of political vendetta, false implication, or clear frivolity.
"It is well settled law, and reaffirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Devinder Kumar Bansal v. State of Punjab, that anticipatory bail in cases involving offences under the Corruption Act is to be granted only in the rarest of rare circumstances. The court is required to be prima facie satisfied either of false implication, political vendetta, or manifest frivolity in the complaint," stated Justice Manjari Nehru Kaul.
This observation came during the hearing of a pre-arrest bail plea by a Patwari named Kewal Singh. He was accused along with Balkar Singh, Superintendent at the Panchayat Samiti Office, of demanding ₹60,000 as illegal gratification from a complainant in return for a favourable inquiry report. The case was registered under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
Kewal Singh’s counsel argued that no recovery was made from his client and that the entire case rests on the alleged actions of the co-accused. He also pointed out that the prosecution relied heavily on an unauthenticated audio recording, which he claimed did not meet the legal standards required under Section 7 of the PC Act.
Read Also:- Allahabad High Court Grants Bail to Two Men Accused of Reciting Hanuman Chalisa Near Mosque in Meerut
However, the Court observed that the prosecution’s case was not based solely on an oral complaint. It was supported by documentary evidence, an audio recording, lawful trap proceedings, and recovery of marked currency from the co-accused.
"The claim of the petitioner regarding lack of direct involvement is a matter of factual determination which cannot be conclusively addressed at this stage while considering a petition for grant of anticipatory bail," noted Justice Kaul.
The judge also stated that the submission of the inquiry report on 29.03.2024 does not rule out the possibility of misconduct either before or after the report, especially given the allegation of a quid pro quo.
The Court found the allegations against Kewal Singh to reflect a serious misuse of official authority and a violation of public trust. The initial evidence, including trap proceedings, indicated the petitioner’s prima facie involvement.
"Considering the seriousness of the allegations, the position of trust held by the petitioner as a public servant, and the need for thorough investigation through custodial interrogation," the Court decided to reject the anticipatory bail plea.
The petitioner was represented by Advocates Mr. J.S. Bhandowal and Ms. Manveer Kaur.
Case Title: Kewal Singh v. State of Punjab
Bench: Justice Manjari Nehru Kaul
