Dec 26, 2020
CBI filed a fresh application(SLP pending) to the Supreme Court for cancellation of his Anticipatory Bail granted in Sarada Chit fund scam. Last year the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has approached the Supreme Court against the Calcutta High Court order, in which the former Kolkata Police Commissioner Rajeev Kumar, was granted anticipatory bail in saradha chit fund case, which is till pending and not taken due to COVID-19 pandemic. The fresh application will be taken to the next week.
Earlier, the Calcutta High Court allowed Bail on a personal bond of Rs 50,000. Rajeev Kumar has been directed by the court to cooperate with the investigation. The grounds on which the CBI challenged the anticipatory bail to Rajeev Kumar are that he has been non-cooperative and evasive, evidence against him are strong and his custodial interrogation is important to complete the investigation. For CBI, Rajib Kumar is the key person who can open all kingpins behind Sardar scam. Rajeev Kumar, is the main culprit in hiding the facts of the Sarda Chit Fund and many other Chit Fund cases in Bengal.
“The prime allegation against the petitioner, as submitted by Mr. Dastur learned Senior Advocate appearing for the CBI before Calcutta High Court was that the petitioner deliberately showed his non-cooperation with the ongoing investigation, questioning the notice since beginning, alleging biasness in the investigation, wrongly interpreting the text of the notice, thereby exposed his arrogancy, obstinancy and defying attitude to obey the terms of the notice, upon advancing frivolous excuses on innumerable counts, and further deliberately tampered and doctorred the CDRs with a delay of about four years, after it was requisitioned, with sole intention of destroying and damaging the material evidence, extending his hands in glove with some other men of potentiality including political dignitaries, so as to give a go by to the allegations levelled against him, and to gloss over some other designed personalities. He has also pointed out to the notices served upon the petitioner and his attitude to evade those notices by taking shelter under the law. It may not be out of place to mention that after such notices under Section 160 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was served upon the petitioner by the investigating agency to examine him, he filed an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure being CRR no. 1308 of 2009, in which the petitioner challenged the proceeding itself and prayed for quashing of the same”.
The Calcutta High Court direction was as below:
“Accordingly, we direct that in the event of his arrest the petitioner shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of like amount each, one of whom must be local having landed property within the jurisdiction of Kolkata, and he shall comply with the conditions as laid down in Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and on further condition that he will render cooperation to the investigating officer by physically presenting himself for interrogation before the CBI at Kolkata, as and when demanded, but at least upon 48 hours prior notice being served upon him.
We make it clear that non-observance of the conditions so imposed, apart from the conditions imbeded in Section 438(2) Cr. P.C., as imposed hereinabove, would enable the CBI to seek cancellation of the bail here in granted without making any reference to the Court and the learned Court below would be at his liberty to go for cancellation on a proven breach of the condition without making reference to this Court”.
