A Special Court in Thane delivered a major setback to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) on Friday, declaring the arrests of a senior Indian Revenue Service (IRS) officer and two co-accused in an alleged ₹1.5-crore bribery case “not legal”. Refusing the agency’s request for custodial interrogation, the court ordered their immediate release on personal bonds of ₹15,000 each.
The case centers on Vinay Kumar Kantheti, a 2009-batch IRS officer serving as Additional Commissioner of Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) in Raigad, alongside CGST Superintendent Rakesh Kumar Sinha and a private intermediary, Narinder Rajput.
The Trap and Allegations
According to the CBI, Superintendent Sinha initially demanded an illegal gratification of ₹1.5 crore from a stone-quarrying firm to resolve a pending GST and royalty dispute. Following negotiations, the demanded sum was reduced to ₹40 lakh.
The agency alleged that the officers instructed the complainant to hand over the bribe money through Rajput. CBI investigators laid a trap on Thursday, catching Rajput red-handed with ₹40 lakh in cash. Subsequent raids across premises linked to the accused led to the recovery of an additional ₹43 lakh in cash and jewellery valued at approximately ₹90 lakh. Kantheti and Sinha were taken into custody shortly after.
Procedural Violations Scrutinized
Produced before the Special Court hours after their detention, the CBI sought five days of police custody, arguing that the transaction pointed to a broader, systematic act of corruption. However, defence counsel Rahul Agrawal, Jasmin Purani, and Harsh Shah successfully challenged the arrest’s lawfulness, pointing to significant procedural non-compliance.
In-charge Additional Sessions Judge M.S. Lone highlighted multiple statutory lapses:
-
Pre-printed Memos: The court observed that the arrest memos were pre-typed forms filled out routinely, failing to show that the grounds and reasons for arrest were actually explained to or understood by the accused.
-
Lack of Written Notice: Investigators failed to notify the relatives of the accused in writing, violating mandatory guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court.
-
Record Maintenance: The court noted that the investigating officer submitted case diary documents tied loosely with a tag rather than maintaining them in accordance with statutory rules.
Custody Refused
Judge Lone concluded that because the alleged bribe money, phones, and physical evidence had already been secured during search operations, no valid justification remained for custodial interrogation.
While the court directed all three individuals to cooperate with the ongoing investigation, CBI sources indicated that the agency intends to challenge the release order in a higher court, maintaining that it complied with legal requirements and holds strong evidence against the accused.
