Arms dealer Abhishek Verma and German military equipment manufacturer Rheinmetall Air Defence AG have been exonerated of corruption charges by a Patiala House court..Verma, Rheinmetall, and two others were charged by the CBI for offences punishable u/s 120B IPC and Section 8 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988..Rheinmetall had earlier entered into a contract with Ordnance Factory Board (OFB) Kolkata, when it was found that a huge bribe was paid to the then Director General of OFB. Consequently, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) had recommended the blacklisting of Rheinmetall..During this process, the CBI claimed that Verma, along with representatives of the company, were trying to influence public servants of the Indian government to stall the process of blacklisting..In its chargesheet filed in June 2013, the CBI alleged that Rheinmetall paid an advance of $530,000 for the purpose of influencing the said public servants..The CBI, represented by Senior Public Prosecutor PK Dogra, alleged that emails exchanged between the accused persons clearly indicate that “such conspiracy had taken place and gratification in the form of USD 5,30,000 were transferred at the instance of accused Abhishek Verma”..However, Special Judge (PC Act) Anju Bajaj Chandna held that there was no substantial evidence to prove the ingredients of criminal conspiracy. On perusal of the emails retrieved by the CBI, the judge said,.“However, in all the above E-mails there is no mention that any public servant is being influenced by accused Abhishek Verma to prevent blacklisting of M/s Rheinmetall Air Defense or that any illegal gratification is to be paid to any public servant out of the amount… therefore, the acts of accused Abhishek Verma cannot be linked or covered within the ambit or definition of Section 8 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988..… E-mails otherwise are not admissible since no proper certificate u/s 65B of Indian Evidence Act is accompanied with the said e-mails….”.Though the judge agreed that circumstantial evidence is used in most corruption cases, the evidence garnered in this case left something to be desired..“Holding of meetings at various places itself constitute no offence unless it is shown that same were for some illegal purpose… I, therefore, conclude that there is no evidence on record showing conspiracy or further any effort made by accused Abhishek Verma or his wife accused Anca Maria Neacsu to influence any public servant or public office to prevent blacklisting of M/s Rheinmetall Air Defence…”.Advocate Maninder Singh appeared for Verma and his accused wife..Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas represented Rheinmetall with a team led by Senior Partner Percival Billimoria along with Partner Sidhartha Barua and Principal Associate Juvraj Singh while Siddarth Aggarwal represented Gerhard Roy, Senior Vice-President of the company..Read order:
Arms dealer Abhishek Verma and German military equipment manufacturer Rheinmetall Air Defence AG have been exonerated of corruption charges by a Patiala House court..Verma, Rheinmetall, and two others were charged by the CBI for offences punishable u/s 120B IPC and Section 8 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988..Rheinmetall had earlier entered into a contract with Ordnance Factory Board (OFB) Kolkata, when it was found that a huge bribe was paid to the then Director General of OFB. Consequently, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) had recommended the blacklisting of Rheinmetall..During this process, the CBI claimed that Verma, along with representatives of the company, were trying to influence public servants of the Indian government to stall the process of blacklisting..In its chargesheet filed in June 2013, the CBI alleged that Rheinmetall paid an advance of $530,000 for the purpose of influencing the said public servants..The CBI, represented by Senior Public Prosecutor PK Dogra, alleged that emails exchanged between the accused persons clearly indicate that “such conspiracy had taken place and gratification in the form of USD 5,30,000 were transferred at the instance of accused Abhishek Verma”..However, Special Judge (PC Act) Anju Bajaj Chandna held that there was no substantial evidence to prove the ingredients of criminal conspiracy. On perusal of the emails retrieved by the CBI, the judge said,.“However, in all the above E-mails there is no mention that any public servant is being influenced by accused Abhishek Verma to prevent blacklisting of M/s Rheinmetall Air Defense or that any illegal gratification is to be paid to any public servant out of the amount… therefore, the acts of accused Abhishek Verma cannot be linked or covered within the ambit or definition of Section 8 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988..… E-mails otherwise are not admissible since no proper certificate u/s 65B of Indian Evidence Act is accompanied with the said e-mails….”.Though the judge agreed that circumstantial evidence is used in most corruption cases, the evidence garnered in this case left something to be desired..“Holding of meetings at various places itself constitute no offence unless it is shown that same were for some illegal purpose… I, therefore, conclude that there is no evidence on record showing conspiracy or further any effort made by accused Abhishek Verma or his wife accused Anca Maria Neacsu to influence any public servant or public office to prevent blacklisting of M/s Rheinmetall Air Defence…”.Advocate Maninder Singh appeared for Verma and his accused wife..Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas represented Rheinmetall with a team led by Senior Partner Percival Billimoria along with Partner Sidhartha Barua and Principal Associate Juvraj Singh while Siddarth Aggarwal represented Gerhard Roy, Senior Vice-President of the company..Read order:
