The Bombay High Court has approved bail for suspended Thane Municipal Corporation (TMC) Deputy Commissioner Shankar Patole and his associates Omkar Ram Gaikar and Sushant Sanjay Surve in connection with a Rs 70-lakh bribery case under investigation by the Maharashtra Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB). The case, which falls under Sections of the Prevention of Corruption (PC) Act, was filed at the Naupada Police Station in Thane.
The case originated from a builder working on a property with unauthorized structures. Initially, Patole requested Rs 20 lakh to take action against these structures, with half of the amount being transferred to Surve. Despite issuing two notices, no further action was taken by Patole regarding the unauthorized structures.
Subsequently, the builder was asked for an additional bribe of Rs 50 lakh by Patole, leading the builder to seek the ACB’s intervention. A sting operation was set up, capturing a conversation where Patole demanded the bribe. Gaikar was caught red-handed while collecting the cash.
Legal representatives Aabad Ponda and Saurabh Butala, representing Patole, argued that the imposed sections do not carry a punishment exceeding seven years and suggested that proper summons should have been issued under Section 41A of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Moreover, it was contended that the detention of the public servant serves no purpose once the investigating agency has gathered all relevant evidence. Attorney Harshad Sathe, on behalf of Gaikar, emphasized that Gaikar was unaware of the contents of the bag containing the alleged bribe.
Despite these arguments, Justice NJ Jamadar acknowledged a prima facie case against the accused based on the available evidence. The court, while noting Patole’s suspension from service, emphasized the importance of preventing tampering with official records and facilitating an unimpeded investigation.
Bail was granted to the three accused with stringent conditions imposed due to the prosecution’s concerns regarding a report of threats against the builder. The court emphasized the need for a thorough investigation but deemed further detention unnecessary at this stage.