Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Bail To AAP MLA Amit Rattan In Corruption Case

Considering that “nothing has been recovered” from him, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has granted bail to AAP MLA Amit Rattan in a corruption case filed in February 2023 under Sections 7, 7(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 120-B IPC at Bathinda.

Rattan was arrested in March after Rashim Garg, alleged to be private PA of the MLA, was apprehended in a trap set by the Vigilance Bureau. The trap was initiated on the basis of the complaint of the husband of a sarpanch, who alleged that both Garg and the MLA were demanding a bribe of Rs. 5 lakh in connection with clearance of payment of certain official works.

The bench of Justice Raj Mohan Singh said:

“No recovery has been effected from the petitioner. The presence of the vehicle outside the circuit house and recovery affected after getting the hands of Rashim Garg washed in the room itself, would remain debatable. As against the promise made by the complainant in respect of Rs.2 lacs, the recovery has been effected in a sum of Rs.4 lacs from Rashim Garg, who is not the official P.A. of the petitioner.”

The complaint made by the husband of a Sarpanch of a village in Bhatinda alleged that the accused MLA was demanding a bribe of Rs.5 lakh in lieu of releasing a government grant of Rs.25 lakh. The complainant alleged that Garg had taken Rs.2.5 lacs from the complainant for appointing S.C Namberdar Gurdas Singh in the village.

According to the prosecution, a trap was laid when Garg called the complainant for the bribe at the circuit house. Garg was apprehended outside the circuit house while driving the vehicle with the alleged bribe money. Thereafter, the DSP, along with the raiding party, entered the circuit house, where the MLA and his personal PA Ranbir Singh, were sitting. When asked by the DSP if Garg was his private P.A., the MLA stated that he knows Garg personally but he is not his PA, according to the prosecution case.

The court noted that the statement of SI Varun Yadav under Section 161 Cr.P.C as reproduced in the earlier part of the order appears to be “totally misplaced” as regards the prosecution story of deputing him as guard to have a watch on the vehicle in question.

It further noted that the statement of Constable Gurmeet Singh would remain “debatable” in the light of words used by him in addressing himself as well as the incharge of the raiding party.

 “When the petitioner was very much present in the room itself, taking of amount away in a car by Rashim Garg outside the circuit house, would remain on debatable note as the same was never intended to hand over to the petitioner in the circuit house itself, particularly in view of the previous proximity of the complainant with Rashim Garg as he had already paid to Rashim Garg an amount of Rs.2.5 lacs for appointing S.C. Namberdar in the village,” said the court.

There is no allegation that such amount of Rs.2.5 lacs was also payable to the petitioner, nor such allegation has come forth i.e. whether the same was got done by the petitioner in the capacity of MLA, the bench noted.

The court said that the presence of the vehicle outside the circuit house and recovery effected after getting the hands of Rashim Garg washed in the room itself, “would remain debatable”.

Granting regular bail to the MLA, the that, “I deem it appropriate to enlarge the petitioner on regular bail on his furnishing adequate bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court/Duty Magistrate.”

Case Title: Amit Rattan vs.State of Punjab

Appearances : R.S. Rai, Sr. Advocate with S.S. Aulakh,and. Anurag Arora, Advocate for the petitioner.

Gaurav Garg Dhuriwala, Addl., A.G, Punjab.

Click Here To Read/Download Order