TrendingVideosIndia
Opinions | CommentEditorialsThe MiddleLetters to the EditorReflections
Sports
State | Himachal PradeshPunjabJammu & KashmirHaryanaChhattisgarhMadhya PradeshRajasthanUttarakhandUttar Pradesh
City | ChandigarhAmritsarJalandharLudhianaDelhiPatialaBathindaShaharnama
World | United StatesPakistan
Diaspora
Features | The Tribune ScienceTime CapsuleSpectrumIn-DepthTravelFood
Business | My MoneyAutoZone
UPSC | Exam ScheduleExam Mentor
Don't Miss
Advertisement

Panchkula: Court declares arrest of tax officials in bribery case illegal

Orders immediate release from custody
The duo had been arrested by the Central Bureau of Investigation.

Unlock Exclusive Insights with The Tribune Premium

Take your experience further with Premium access. Thought-provoking Opinions, Expert Analysis, In-depth Insights and other Member Only Benefits
Yearly Premium ₹999 ₹349/Year
Yearly Premium $49 $24.99/Year
Advertisement

A Special CBI Court, presided over by Judge Rajeev Goyal, declared the arrest of two accused — Tanoj Yadav and Aakash Rohilla — as illegal and ordered their immediate release from custody.

Advertisement

The duo had been arrested by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in connection with a case involving an alleged bribe demand of Rs 10 lakh by officials of the CGST Department, Faridabad.

Advertisement

The arrest had followed a complaint lodged by one Manoj Malik, who alleged that four persons, posing as CGST officials, including Inspector Bhagat Singh and Superintendent Tanoj Yadav, had demanded a bribe for not initiating a Rs 1.5 crore tax demand against his wife’s firm. During the trap laid by the CBI, Aakash Rohilla was caught accepting the bribe money. Subsequently, both Rohilla and Yadav were taken into custody.

However, during the court proceedings, advocates Deepanshu Bansal and KP Singh, appearing on behalf of accused Tanoj Yadav, argued that the arrest was illegal as it was carried out without providing written grounds of arrest to the accused at the time of detention, in violation of constitutional and statutory rights.

The defence cited several Supreme Court judgments, including Prabir Purkayastha v. State (NCT of Delhi) and Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India, which mandate that written grounds of arrest must be furnished at the time of arrest to enable the accused to exercise their legal rights effectively.

Advertisement

After examining the case records and arrest memos, the court found that although grounds of arrest were mentioned in the documents, they were merely shown to the accused and not physically provided.

The court held that such a procedural lapse violated Article 22(1) of the Constitution and Section 50 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Consequently, the court dismissed the CBI’s remand application and allowed the defence application, ruling the arrest of both accused as illegal.

Both Tanoj Yadav and Aakash Rohilla were released from custody forthwith, and the matter was closed with directions to consigned papers to the record room.

Advertisement
Show comments
Advertisement