Madhya Pradesh High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail To Narcotics Inspector Accused Of Taking Bribe For Granting Opium License

The Indore Bench of Madhya Pradesh High Court recently denied anticipatory bail to a Narcotics Inspector booked for being involved in taking bribe through another person to facilitate grant of opium license.Justice Subodh Abhyankar observed, “…it is not necessary that a person must receive the amount/undue advantage in his hands only, and there may be instances that he may obtain the same through some other person, and in such circumstances, he cannot avoid his liability and cannot get away just by saying that he was not caught red handed.”The petitioner–Narcotics Inspector, Central Bureau of Narcotics, Mandsaur had moved a plea for grant of anticipatory bail, apprehending arrest for offences punishable under Section 61(2) of BNS (Whoever is a party to a criminal conspiracy) read with Section 7 (Offence relating to public servant being bribed) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.It was alleged that the applicant was involved in the case wherein bribe of Rs.1,20,000 was demanded from the complainant Badrilal, on the pretext of granting him opium licence, however, the bribe of Rs.1,10,000/- was received on behalf of the applicant by co-accused Kantu kumar and Ram Niwas.The counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant was not present on the spot and amount has also not been recovered from the applicant as he has been falsely implicated in the case as he has no power to grant the opium license. Moreover, the license was already granted to the complainant even before the other co-accused persons were trapped.On the contrary, the counsel for the respondent submitted that no case for interference is made out as the applicant is involved in a serious case of corruption wherein a huge bribe of Rs.1,20,000/-was demanded from the complainant. The other co-accused persons have been caught red handed along with a sum of Rs.1,10,000/- and have also disclosed that they were acting on behalf of the applicant. It was further submitted that a transcript of voice recorder is also available in which the applicant has clearly demanded the bribe from the complainant. The court after looking into the facts of the case, inferred that custodial interrogation of the applicant is necessary, thus, it is not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail. The court also referred to Section 7 of the PC Act which provides that a public servant, who obtains from any person an undue advantage with the intention to perform or cause performance of public duty improperly or dishonestly either by himself or by another public servant shall be liable to be punished. Thus, the court opined that it was not necessary for the applicant to take the bribe in his hands only and that bribe may be obtained through another person also. In both these circumstances, liability cannot be avoided, it added.“…in a serious case of bribe like the present one where a Narcotic Inspector himself is involved in demanding and taking huge bribe through another person to facilitate grant of opium licence, this court does not find it to be a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant,” the Court said.The application was hence, dismissed.Case Title: Abhishek Versus Central Bureau Of Investigation, Misc. Criminal Case No. 862 of 2025Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 26Click Here To Read/Download Order

Madhya Pradesh High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail To Narcotics Inspector Accused Of Taking Bribe For Granting Opium License

Anukriti Mishra

Tags