SC ruling on Prabhakar Rao’s bail plea in urea scam on Aug 5

Rao, who has been interrogated twice by investigating agencies since the scam broke last year, moved the HC for anticipatory bail after he failed to answer summons for interrogation subsequently on health grounds. Anticipatory bail was granted by the HC on March 26, 1997.

The judges observed during the proceedings today that nowhere did the HC state in its order that no material existed against Rao. “We find that bail has been granted only on the ground that the petitioner is suffering from spondilytis,” the judges said.

The Court said it was of the view that the HC should have considered the magnitude of the offence as well as the nature of accusations against the petitioner before deciding on his anticipatory bail plea. The judges noted that the nature of accusations in the present case was of a superlative degree and there could be no two views that those who have committed the crime should be brought to book.

They said the HC itself had been of the view that an accusing finger seems to be pointing against the petitioner but had granted the bail on health grounds.

Senior counsel DD Thakur, appearing for Rao, told the Court that on the face of it there was no perversity in the HC order, and that the Court had indeed gone into the merits of the case before granting bail.

The judges, who were not convinced, told Thakur that the Court will have to study the case diaries and files relating to the investigations before coming to any conclusion on whether there was material against the petitioner to deny him bail.

The Court turned down a plea by Thakur that the judges could hear defence arguments after reading the case diaries. The judges made it clear that the Court cannot divulge the details of the case diaries to the accused at this stage.

The case against Rao is an offshoot of the urea scam, where US $ 38-million worth of urea was to have been supplied by a Turkish firm Karsan Incorporates to the National Fertilisers Limited.