[Yes Bank scam] CBI opposes bail plea by wife, daughters of Rana Kapoor in Bombay High Court

Refusing grant of bail to Yes Bank founder Rana Kapoor's wife, Bindu Kapoor and daughters, Roshini and Radha Kapoor, was not wrong in law, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) submitted to the Bombay High Court on Wednesday. (Bindu Kapoor v. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr. and connected matters).Justice Bharati Dangre was hearing bail applications moved by Kapoor's wife and daughters (petitioners) after a Mumbai Special Court on Saturday not only denied them bail but also remanded them to judicial custody till September 23, 2021..Through applications filed by Jaykar & Partners, the petitioners sought to quash the bail rejection orders..Advocate Hiten Venegaokar, appearing for the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), on Wednesday informed the High Court that the Special Court was merely securing the presence of the accused for the purpose of trial, which is why the accused were remanded to judicial custody..He added that bail was rejected in exercise of the Special Court's discretion and that, hence, bail was rejected on merits. .Justifying the decision of the Special judge, Advocate Venegaokar argued that once cognizance had been taken in a case, and the trial was yet to begin, the Court had the power to send the accused to judicial custody under Section 309 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC)..On the other hand, Senior Advocate Mahesh Jethmalani argued, for petitioners Bindu and Radha Kapoor, that the requirement for arrest and custody arose only in special circumstances where there was a possibility that the accused may abscond..Supplementing Jethmalani's submission, Senior Advocate Amit Desai, appearing for Roshini (petitioner) argued that the purpose of issuing summons to a person was to ensure the person faces trial. He argued that the petitioners had appeared in court upon issuance of summons and were directed by the Special Judge to file for bail. Due to practical difficulties, they could not challenge that order, he said. In any case, they would have been in custody already had they challenged the order, he added.."It is important to note that she appeared and was going to co-operate and would continue to do so... " Desai said, while concluding his submissions for the day. .Due to paucity of time, Justice Dangre adjourned the matter for further hearing tomorrow, when Desai will continue with his submissions.