What Led to the 3-Year Imprisonment of a Former ED Officer in a Bribery Case?

Click to start listening
What Led to the 3-Year Imprisonment of a Former ED Officer in a Bribery Case?

Synopsis

In a significant ruling, a former ED officer in Bengaluru has been sentenced to three years in prison for bribery, highlighting the ongoing fight against corruption in India. The case reveals alarming tactics used by public servants to extort money from private individuals under duress.

Key Takeaways

  • Lalit Bazad sentenced to three years in prison and fined Rs 5.5 lakh.
  • Conviction based on evidence including witness statements and CDR.
  • Charges related to bribery and extortion under the IPC and Prevention of Corruption Act.
  • Case highlights corruption issues within public offices.
  • Reinforces the need for accountability among public officials.

Bengaluru, July 25 (NationPress) A special Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) court has handed down a three-year prison sentence to a former Directorate of Enforcement (ED) officer along with a fine of Rs 5.5 lakh in a bribery case, according to an official statement released on Friday.

The convict, Lalit Bazad, previously served as an enforcement officer at the ED's Bengaluru office.

He was on deputation from the Central Goods and Services Tax and Central Excise department based in Chennai. The charges against him stem from his demand and acceptance of Rs 5 lakh as illicit payment from a private complainant.

The CBI's statement indicated that Bazad threatened the complainant with potential illegal repercussions to his business and reputation, subjecting him to a prolonged legal ordeal.

In March 2023, the Special Court for CBI cases had instructed the framing of charges against Lalit Bazad for acts punishable under Section 384 IPC and Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (Amended), related to allegations of extortion in a case concerning harassment linked to instant loans offered by mobile applications associated with China.

The court previously noted: “The testimony of witnesses is corroborated by relevant Call Detail Records (CDR) and CCTV footage, providing sufficient evidence to establish a clear prima facie case against the accused. A strong suspicion is adequate for framing charges, yet in this instance, there is substantial prima facie evidence implicating the accused.”

The court further stated, “The evidence indicates that the accused is a public servant, a responsible ED official who extorted money from Mikhil Innani, the director of Apollo Finvest.”

The chargesheet detailed that the convict had requested and received a bribe of Rs 5 lakh from Innani, who was summoned to the ED office on February 2, 2021.

Investigations uncovered that an ECIR was initiated on January 13, 2021, to investigate claims of harassment and the Chinese connection to mobile applications facilitating instant loans. The convict was collaborating with Manoj Mittal, the deputy director at the ED, who was the lead investigator.

Bazad initially sought Rs 50 lakh in cash from Innani during his visit to the ED office in Bengaluru, threatening to involve Apollo Finvest in the investigation if his demands were not met, which could jeopardize the company's business.

Earlier in February 2021, CBI officials arrested a multi-tasking staff member at the Enforcement Directorate in Bengaluru for allegedly posing as an enforcement officer and attempting to extort Rs 2 crore from a businessman under the threat of conducting raids.

Point of View

The sentencing of Lalit Bazad underscores the imperative need for accountability among public officials. This case serves as a reminder that the legal system is committed to upholding justice and combating corruption in all its forms.
NationPress
26/07/2025

Frequently Asked Questions

What was Lalit Bazad convicted of?
Lalit Bazad was convicted of demanding and accepting a bribe of Rs 5 lakh from a private complainant, threatening legal consequences if his demands were not met.
What are the implications of the case?
The case highlights the systemic issues of corruption within public institutions and reinforces the importance of holding officials accountable for their actions.
How was the evidence against Bazad gathered?
Evidence included witness statements, Call Detail Records (CDR), and CCTV footage supporting the allegations of extortion.
What legal sections were invoked in this case?
Charges were framed under Section 384 of the IPC and Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (Amended).
What is the significance of this ruling?
This ruling marks a critical step in India's ongoing battle against corruption, demonstrating the judiciary's commitment to justice.