DELHI: On Wednesday, Delhi Court granted Bail to Amanatullah Khan and 10 others. Amanatullah Khan is in the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), a Member of the Legislative Assembly (MLA) and Chairman of the Delhi Waqf Board. He was accused by the Central Bureau of Investigation.

On 23rd November 2016, an FIR in the case was registered under Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, and Section 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

He was alleged to have engaged in illegal practices by appointing retired Indian Police Service (IPS) officer Mahboob Alam as the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the Delhi Waqf Board and his relatives and associates to daily wage positions on the Board.

CBI said that these kinds of appointments were made in collusion as part of a criminal conspiracy.

During the hearing, the counsel member of the accused Advocates Dilshad Ali, Shahryar Khan, and Wajeeh SShafiq said that all the accused were falsely implicated in the case and that all the appointments were made following due procedure. They also mentioned that the Case was filed by the CBI to harass Khan and others

Counsel for former IPS officer Alam stated that the allegations were pointless and that no allegation of bribery was made by the prosecution against him. He also underscored that Alam was a retired IPS officer with an unblemished career track record.

On the Contrary, the Counsel member Special Public Prosecutor Pankaj Gupta opposed the Bail and that Khan and Alam had misused their official positions to cause a loss of ₹27,20,494 to the exchequer of the Delhi government.

The Court observed that-

“The liberty of an accused is of paramount consideration and his constitutional right to life and liberty is required to be protected and safeguarded while considering the question of grant of bail to him”

 COURT OBSERVATIONS:

The Court observed that since the investigation had been ongoing for long six years and none of the applicants had been arrested during this time, the CBI had no right to oppose the bail applications.

Further, the Court highlighted that no allegation of demand, payment or acceptance of money was made.

Hence, the Court granted bail to the accused.