The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has arrested an IRS officer serving as Further Commissioner of Central Items and Companies Tax (CGST) in Maharashtra’s Raigad district, Vinay Kumar Kanheti (IRS-2009), together with CGST Superintendent Rakesh Kumar Sinha and a personal particular person, Narinder Rajput, in a bribery case.
The CBI registered the case on August 26 in opposition to CGST Superintendent Rakesh Kumar Sinha following allegations that he had demanded an undue benefit of Rs 1.50 crore to settle a GST/royalty matter involving the complainant’s stone-quarrying agency.
After negotiations, the demand was subsequently diminished to Rs 40 lakh. The accused public servants had organized for the bribe to be collected by means of a personal particular person and, accordingly, directed the complainant to make the fee.
The CBI laid a entice and caught the personal particular person red-handed whereas accepting the Rs 40 lakh bribe. The acceptance of the bribe quantity was subsequently acknowledged by CGST Superintendent Rakesh Kumar Sinha and Further Commissioner of CGST Vinay Kumar Kanheti.
Searches carried out on the premises of the accused individuals resulted within the restoration of Rs 43 lakh in money and jewelry price roughly Rs 90 lakh.
COURT REJECTS REMAND, HOLDS ARRESTS ILLEGAL
The Particular Court docket at Thane, whereas listening to the CBI ACB Mumbai’s remand utility, rejected the CBI’s request for additional custodial interrogation and held the arrest of Vinay Kumar Kanheti, IRS officer and Further Commissioner, CGST, accused No. 3, unlawful.
The CBI had sought 5 days of police custody, alleging a scientific act of corruption. The defence challenged the legality of the arrests and relied upon Supreme Court docket judgments in Vihaan Kumar v. State of Haryana & Anr. and Mihir Rajesh Shah v. State of Maharashtra & Anr., emphasising the obligatory requirement of speaking the grounds and causes for arrest and the obligation of the Justice of the Peace to scrutinise the legality of the arrest.
Upon analyzing the arrest memos and case diary, the court docket discovered that the arrest information didn’t set up that the accused had been correctly knowledgeable of and understood the grounds and causes for his or her arrest. The court docket additional famous that the kinfolk of the accused had not been knowledgeable in writing and consequently held that the arrests of all three accused weren’t authorized.
The court docket additionally discovered no passable justification for additional custodial interrogation, notably for the reason that alleged bribe cash had already been seized and cell phones had been recovered from the accused. The CBI’s remand utility was accordingly rejected.
The court docket directed the speedy launch of all three accused, topic to a PR bond (private recognizance bond) of Rs 15,000 every and furnishing sureties of a like quantity. It additionally directed them to cooperate with the investigation as and when known as.
Additional investigation into the case is constant.
– Ends
