Facts of the Case

The applicant, Gopal Bhatter, sought return of Rs. 30 lakh in cash seized by the CBI, Anti-Corruption Branch, Mumbai, along with a laptop and two mobile phones, during investigation of a case registered under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The underlying FIR alleged bribery of the Superintendent, CGST, Mumbai, for not enhancing a GST evasion/tax liability assessment against a complainant and for not arresting him. A charge-sheet had been filed against the applicant for the Section 7 offence. During the trap operation, co-accused Hemant was allegedly caught accepting the bribe amount at the applicant's instance, on behalf of co-accused Amit Dalal. The applicant's earlier applications for return of the cash — first before the Sessions Court (rejected on 25.08.2021) and this being his second application — argued the cash was unrelated to the alleged bribery and was kept at his home/office in the ordinary course of business.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the Rs. 30 lakh cash seized from the applicant's house and office had any established connection with the alleged bribery offence under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, warranting its continued retention by the investigating agency.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • There was no material connecting the seized cash of Rs. 30 lakh to the alleged offence.
  • The cash was kept in the ordinary course of business and not deposited in a bank for stated reasons.
  • The applicant was not charged with disproportionate assets, only with the specific bribery transaction involving a smaller amount handled by the co-accused.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The CBI opposed return of the cash, submitting that the source of the recovered amount was still being examined and analysis reports of the seized laptop and mobile phone data were awaited, and that the amount might also be linked to bribery.

Court Order / Findings

  • The Court found the prosecution's own case, as per the charge-sheet, was specific: that co-accused Amit Dalal had demanded the bribe and it was accepted at the applicant's instance and handed to Dalal — a transaction distinct from the seized cash.
  • The submission that the CBI wished to further probe whether the seized cash was also bribe money was found to lack merit given the specific charge-sheet allegations.
  • Finding no justification to retain the amount, the Court set aside the impugned order and directed the Special Judge, CBI, to ensure return of the Rs. 30 lakh cash to the applicant within four weeks.

Important Clarification

This is a Prevention of Corruption Act matter about return of case property (seized cash) pending trial — it does not decide any question of GST law. The predicate allegation (that a CGST officer was bribed not to enhance a GST evasion assessment) forms only the background of the corruption case; no GST assessment, liability, or evasion question was before this Court or decided by it.

Sections Involved

  • Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Section 7
  • Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Sections 451 and 457 (custody/disposal of case property)

Decision – In Favour of

Decided in favour of the applicant — the CBI was directed to return the seized Rs. 30 lakh cash within four weeks, the impugned rejection order having been set aside.

Case Details

  • Court: High Court of Judicature at Bombay (Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction)
  • Case No.: Criminal Application No. 378 of 2023
  • Coram: Justice Bharati Dangre
  • Date of Order: 5 September 2023

Link to Download the Order

Click here to view/download the full order

Disclaimer

This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.