close
close

topicnews · September 8, 2024

CGST superintendent and two others arrested by CBI in bribery case

CGST superintendent and two others arrested by CBI in bribery case

Mumbai: CGST superintendent and two others nabbed by CBI in bribery case | Representative image

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has arrested three accused, including a Superintendent of CGST (Anti-Evasion), Mumbai West Commissionerate and two private persons – one of them a Chartered Accountant (CA) – during the trap proceedings while they were accepting a part of the bribe amount of Rs 20 lakh out of the negotiated undue benefit of Rs 60 lakh demanded as bribe. An amount of Rs 30 lakh of the total bribe amount was allegedly paid earlier through hawala, agency officials said on Sunday.

The persons named in the FIR are Deepak Kumar Sharma, Deputy Commissioner, CGST Commissioner, Mumbai West, CGST Superintendents Sachin Gokulka, Bijender Janawa, Nikhil Agrawal, Nitin Kumar Gupta, Deputy Commissioner, CGST Rahul Kumar, Chartered Accountant Raj Aggarwal and one Abhishek Mehta (private person). The persons arrested by the CBI are Sachin Gokulka, Raj Aggarwal and Abhishek Mehta.

The CBI had registered a case against a resident of Goregaon on a complaint against eight accused, including six CGST officials. According to the accused, Sachin Gokulka and other CGST officials, through middleman Raj Aggarwal, demanded a bribe of Rs 60 lakhs to settle a pharmaceutical company’s matter pending with Gokulka.

“It was alleged that when the complainant visited the CGST office at Santacruz on the evening of 04.09.2024, he was detained in the office all night and was released only on 05.09.2024 after about 18 hours. It was also alleged that while the complainant was in detention, one of the accused Superintendents of CGST (bribe taker) demanded a bribe of Rs. 80 lakh in order not to arrest him, which was later reduced to Rs. 60 lakh. Further, it was alleged that three other colleagues of the said Superintendent (all being Superintendents of CGST) joined him in pressurising the complainant, including by repeatedly using force and verbal abuse,” a CBI official said.

“The plaintiff was allegedly forced to call his cousin during his detention to inform him of the demand for undue advantage by the CGST officials for not arresting the plaintiff and favouring him in the ongoing investigation by the CGST. It was also alleged that the plaintiff’s cousin subsequently contacted one accused CA who in turn contacted other accused private persons and senior CGST officials including accused JC, CGST. Both accused CA and the other accused private person visited the CGST office in the intervening night and negotiated with the CGST officials for the bribe. It was also alleged that the bribe demand was fixed for an amount of Rs. 60 lakhs to be delivered to the CGST officials through accused CA. Out of a negotiated bribe of Rs. 60 lakhs, Rs. 30 lakhs was allegedly paid by the plaintiff’s cousin through an angadia. It was further alleged that the complainant was not allowed to leave the CGST office until the next day,” the official further said.

The CBI team laid a trap and caught the accused CA red-handed while accepting an amount of Rs. 20 lakh from the remaining bribe amount on behalf of CGST officials. “Further, a controlled bribe delivery was carried out to lure the other accused private person into a trap to forward the bribe to CGST officials through accused Superintendent CGST (bribe recipient). During further trapping, accused Superintendent CGST (bribe recipient) called the other accused private person to meet him near Oshiwara police station and collect bribe amount. Thereafter, the said accused Superintendent CGST was also arrested by the CBI team,” the officer said.

The CBI arrested all the three accused mentioned above, who were involved in bribery, during the proceedings. They were produced before the Special Court for CBI cases in Mumbai. The court granted CBI custody of the arrested Superintendents CGST and CA till 10.09.2024, while the arrested private person was remanded in judicial custody. Searches were conducted at nine locations at the official and residential premises of the accused in and around Mumbai, which led to the recovery of various incriminating documents.