Mumbai: The sessions court has on Friday granted anticipatory bail to government railway police (GRP) inspector Rohit Sawant, booked for corruption charges, holding that custodial interrogation is not required for recording his voice sample.
Observation Made By The Judge
The sessions judge S. S. Nagur, while granting anticipatory bail to Sawant, held that, “for recording the voice sample, the custodial interrogation is not required. The applicant is ready to give a voice sample and surrender his mobile phone. Hence, I hold that the applicant is entitled to anticipatory bail on stringent conditions”
“The conversation of the transcript of the recording and mobile communication is already prepared. Only the investigation in respect of the applicant is recording of his voice sample,” the court said while refusing to reject Sawant’s plea.
The court directed him to present himself before the investigating officer between 10:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. from September 27 to September 29, 2025. The applicant must record his voice sample and hand over his mobile phone if required by the Investigating Officer. Sawant is also required to remain present during the trial on every hearing date without fail.
Sawant was booked for allegedly demanding a bribe to avoid implicating the complainant in an extortion case. Sawant had been entrusted with investigating the Bandra extortion case registered against GRP officers. However, he is alleged to have demanded Rs.10 lakh from the complainant to avoid implicating the complainant’s brother-in-law. The demand was allegedly made through a lawyer named Arunkumar Singh, and the complainant reportedly paid Rs. 5 lakh to the lawyer on September 13. When the two allegedly demanded the remaining amount, the complainant approached the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB).
The ACB arrested the lawyer in a trap on September 22, but Sawant was not found. Sawant's lawyers, Sharad Mulik and M.N. Yadav, approached the court for anticipatory bail on September 25.
Meanwhile, in his plea, Sawant claimed that he is innocent and has not demanded any bribe from the complainant. He stated that he did not receive any bribe, and the alleged amount was recovered from the lawyer. Sawant further claimed that he has been falsely implicated in the case since he had registered a case against the complainant’s brother-in-law.
The plea was objected to by the public prosecutor Ratnavali Patil, claiming that there is apprehension that at the time of recording the voice sample, the applicant may tamper with it; therefore, the custodial interrogation of the applicant is necessary.
The court, after hearing both sides, noted that, “There is a transcript of conversations between informant, co-accused and applicant. There is also a transcript of a mobile conversation between the applicant and co co-accused. According to the prosecution, the applicant in the said conversation said “OK” when the co-accused told him the amount of the bribe given by the informant. In respect of the verification of demand, the informant and co-accused went to the office of the applicant. There was talk about the demand for the bribe. The entire conversation between the parties is to be taken into consideration.”
To get details on exclusive and budget-friendly property deals in Mumbai & surrounding regions, do visit: https://budgetproperties.in/
