38.6c New Delhi, India, Monday, January 12, 2026
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
Subscribe Contact Us
close
Crime, Police And Law

CBI Judge Denies Bail to Former Maharashtra Home Minister Anil Deshmukh's Lawyer Anand Daga and Sub-Inspector Abhishek Tiwari

By Nargis Bano      13 September, 2021 02:29 PM      0 Comments
CBI Judge Denies Bail to Former Maharashtra Home Minister Anil Deshmukh

On Wednesday, (September,8, 2021), Special CBI Judge Vimal Kumar Yadav denied bail to former Maharashtra Home Minister Anil Deshmukh's lawyer, Anand Daga, and Sub-Inspector Abhishek Tiwari in the case of alleged document leakage.

The Court also ordered both to be produced on September 20,2021, when their judicial custody expires.

The FIR was filed against Daga, Tiwari, and unknown others, alleging that they conspired to reveal case sensitive and confidential documents to Anand Daga in exchange for undue advantage and illegal gratification.

The arrests came after the CBI filed a FIR against the sub-inspector, a Nagpur-based advocate, and unidentified individuals on various charges, including illegal gratification.

On August 29,2021, a report allegedly based on a preliminary investigation conducted by the CBI was leaked to the media. According to the report, the agency concluded that "no cognizable offence has been committed by Anil Deshmukh."

In its preliminary investigation, the CBI discovered that Deshmukh's legal team attempted to bribe some lower-ranking CBI officials, according to its internal investigation. Strict punishment will be meted out to the employees involved in the case.

Anand Daga and Sub-Inspector Abhishek Tiwari were previously remanded in judicial custody for 14 days after the Court denied the CBI's request to extend their custody for 5 days.

Anand Daga and Sub-Inspector Abhishek Tiwari were apprehended by the CBI in Mumbai and Delhi, respectively.

The aforementioned FIR was filed in accordance with Sections 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 7 and 8 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.



Share this article:



Leave a feedback about this
TRENDING NEWS


TOP STORIES

wrong-bail-orders-alone-without-evidence-of-corruption-cannot-justify-removal-of-judicial-officer-sc
Trending Judiciary
Wrong Bail Orders Alone, Without Evidence of Corruption, Cannot Justify Removal of Judicial Officer: SC [Read Judgment]

Supreme Court rules that wrong bail orders alone cannot justify removal of a judicial officer without proof of corruption, misconduct, or extraneous considerations.

06 January, 2026 07:43 PM
divorced-muslim-woman-can-seek-maintenance-under-crpc-even-after-receiving-amount-under-muslim-women-protection-act-kerala-hc
Trending Judiciary
Divorced Muslim Woman Can Seek Maintenance Under CrPC Even After Receiving Amount Under Muslim Women Protection Act: Kerala HC [Read Order]

Kerala High Court holds that a divorced Muslim woman can claim maintenance under Section 125 CrPC even after receiving amounts under the 1986 Act.

06 January, 2026 08:19 PM
delhi-hc-full-bench-settles-bsf-seniority-dispute-rule-of-continuous-regular-appointment-prevails
Trending Judiciary
Delhi HC Full Bench Settles BSF Seniority Dispute; Rule of ‘Continuous Regular Appointment’ Prevails [Read Judgment]

Delhi High Court Full Bench rules BSF seniority is based on date of continuous regular appointment, rejecting claims for antedated seniority due to delayed joining.

06 January, 2026 08:45 PM
borrowers-cannot-invoke-writ-jurisdiction-to-compel-banks-to-extend-one-time-settlement-benefits-kerala-hc
Trending Judiciary
Borrowers Cannot Invoke Writ Jurisdiction to Compel Banks to Extend One-Time Settlement Benefits: Kerala HC [Read Judgment]

Kerala High Court holds borrowers cannot invoke writ jurisdiction to compel banks to grant One-Time Settlement benefits, as OTS is not a legal right.

07 January, 2026 09:22 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email