The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has arrested Vinay Kumar Kanheti (IRS-2009), an IRS officer serving as Additional Commissioner of Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) in Maharashtra's Raigad district, along with CGST Superintendent Rakesh Kumar Sinha and private individual Narinder Rajput in connection with an alleged bribery case.
The CBI registered the case on August 26 against CGST Superintendent Rakesh Kumar Sinha after alleging that he had sought an illegal payment of Rs 1.50 crore to resolve a GST and royalty-related matter involving the complainant's stone-quarrying company.
Following negotiations, the alleged bribe demand was reduced to Rs 40 lakh. The accused officials reportedly arranged for the money to be collected through a private individual and instructed the complainant to make the payment.
The CBI subsequently set a trap and caught the private individual while allegedly accepting the Rs 40 lakh bribe. The receipt of the money was later acknowledged by CGST Superintendent Rakesh Kumar Sinha and Additional Commissioner Vinay Kumar Kanheti.
Searches at the accused persons' premises led to the recovery of Rs 43 lakh in cash and jewellery valued at approximately Rs 90 lakh.
COURT FINDS ARRESTS ILLEGAL, REJECTS CUSTODY REQUEST
The Special Court in Thane, while considering the remand application filed by the CBI's Anti-Corruption Bureau in Mumbai, rejected the agency's request for further custodial interrogation and ruled that the arrest of Vinay Kumar Kanheti, the IRS officer and Additional Commissioner of CGST, was illegal.
The CBI had requested five days of police custody, describing the alleged offence as part of a systematic corruption operation. The defence challenged the legality of the arrests, citing Supreme Court judgments in Vihaan Kumar v. State of Haryana & Anr. and Mihir Rajesh Shah v. State of Maharashtra & Anr. The defence highlighted the mandatory requirement to communicate the grounds and reasons for arrest and the Magistrate's responsibility to examine whether an arrest was legally valid.
After reviewing the arrest memos and case diary, the court concluded that the documents did not demonstrate that the accused had been properly informed of and understood the grounds and reasons for their arrests. The court also observed that the accused's relatives had not been informed in writing.
On this basis, the court held that the arrests of all three accused were unlawful.
The court further found insufficient grounds for continued custodial interrogation, particularly because the alleged bribe money had already been recovered and mobile phones had been seized from the accused.
The CBI's request for remand was therefore rejected.
The court ordered the immediate release of all three accused, subject to each furnishing a personal recognizance bond of Rs 15,000 and a surety for the same amount. They were also directed to cooperate with the investigation whenever required.
