The High Court on Monday dismissed the bail petition of Nimmagadda Prasad, industrialist and key accused in the Vanpic project land allotment case, on the ground that some more important areas of investigation were left to be attended to and evidence was to be collected.
Justice Samudrala Govindarajulu said in his order that having regard to the personal and financial clout of the accused, it could not be ruled out that witnesses, who included employees and persons relating to him, could be influenced if he was released on bail at this stage.
“In the light of the submission made by CBI’s counsel, it cannot be said that investigation is totally complete in relation to the petitioner’s involvement.
In the case of Sanjay Chandra v. CBI, the Supreme Court concluded that “the grant or refusal to grant bail lies within the discretion of the court. The grant or denial is regulated to a large extent by the facts and circumstances of each particular case.”
Referring to contention of Prasad’s counsel that the petitioner had no oblique intentions to subvert the MoU (memorandum of understanding) between RAK (Ras Al Khaimah) and the government of Andhra Pradesh and that he was a successful industrialist and business entrepreneur, the judge said it could not be said that there was no triable case against the accused in view of the prosecution’s allegations and documentary and oral evidence collected by the CBI.
The CBI counsel contended that investigation was not totally complete and the role of RAK vis-a-vis Prasad was still under investigation.
The judge said that it cannot be concluded that tampering with evidence or the investigation cannot occur simply because a charge sheet was filed.
Even though the charge sheet was filed in this case, still some more important areas of investigation were left to be attended to and evidence was to be collected, he noted.