Court Stresses Need for Custodial Interrogation to Uncover Corruption Conspiracy Involving Over Rs. 12 Crore
In a significant ruling, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has denied anticipatory bail to Vishal Kaushik and another petitioner in a high-profile corruption case involving serious allegations of forgery, conspiracy, and misappropriation of public funds exceeding Rs. 12 crore. The judgment, delivered by Justice Sumeet Goel, emphasized the necessity of custodial interrogation for effective investigation into the alleged fraudulent activities that have shaken public confidence in governmental institutions.
The petitioners were implicated in FIR No. 0023, filed on August 12, 2025, alleging that officials from the Municipal Corporation Faridabad, in collusion with contractor Satbir Singh, fraudulently prepared fake work orders related to municipal roadwork, leading to illegal financial gains and substantial losses to the public exchequer. Despite claims by the petitioners' counsel that they were falsely implicated and their roles were merely clerical, the court found the allegations too grave to ignore.
Justice Goel's judgment highlighted the balance courts must maintain between individual rights and societal interests, particularly in cases involving economic offences and corruption. The ruling referenced the Supreme Court's guidelines on anticipatory bail, underscoring that such relief should only be granted in exceptional circumstances where allegations are demonstrably false or politically motivated.
The court's decision was further supported by the State's argument, which stressed the petitioners' active participation in a criminal conspiracy and the critical need for custodial interrogation to trace the money trail and gather further evidence. The court dismissed the petitioners' plea regarding multiple FIRs and earlier bail grants in related cases, noting that each application must be judged on its own merits, especially in complex corruption cases.
Justice Goel's order concluded that granting anticipatory bail at this stage would impede the investigation, given the severity and magnitude of the allegations. The petition was therefore dismissed, allowing the investigation to proceed unhindered, with the court reiterating the importance of combating corruption to maintain public trust in administrative processes.
Bottom Line:
Anticipatory bail in corruption cases involving serious economic offences, abuse of official position, and conspiracy requires careful scrutiny. Courts must balance individual rights and societal interests, especially where custodial interrogation is deemed necessary for effective investigation.
Statutory provision(s): Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 482, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 Sections 7, 13(1)(a), 13(2), Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 Sections 438, 482.
Vishal Kaushik v. State of Haryana, (Punjab And Haryana) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2838092
