Court Rejects Bail of Suspended Gujarat Officer Ketaki Vyas in ₹3.56 Crore Disproportionate Assets Case

A special Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) court has rejected the bail application of former Resident Additional Collector (RAC) Ketaki Vyas in connection with a ₹3.56 crore disproportionate assets case.

Refusing relief to the Class-1 officer, the court observed that economic offences involving illegal wealth inflict direct damage on public trust in government machinery and carry a wide impact on society. The bench noted that despite being a senior officer well-versed in revenue laws, Vyas evaded the ACB probe for a prolonged period, raising genuine concerns that she might abscond during the trial if released on bail.

Court Cites Need for Custodial Interrogation

The special court emphasized that police custodial interrogation of the accused officer remains essential to thoroughly investigate her property acquisitions across multiple locations and scrutinize associated bank transactions.

Addressing the defence submissions, the court highlighted that documents regarding income and investments presented by the applicant lacked verified signatures and stamps from her or a Chartered Accountant, making their authenticity unverified at this stage. The court further remarked that legal precedents cited by the defence did not apply to the specific facts of this case. Holding that a prima facie case of involvement exists while the investigation is ongoing, the court declined to exercise its discretionary powers.

Evaded Probe Following Corruption Offence

The ACB registered a case against the Resident Additional Collector for illegally accumulating assets worth ₹3.56 crore, amounting to an alleged 68.84% disproportionate wealth over her known legal income sources, in her name and under the names of her relatives. Vyas had evaded ACB investigators for months to avoid arrest, filing anticipatory bail applications before both the Sessions Court and the Gujarat High Court, which were subsequently dismissed. CID Crime later arrested her, and the probe remains at a crucial stage with the charge sheet yet to be filed.

During the hearing, Vyas maintained her innocence, claiming she was falsely implicated and that no prima facie case existed. Her counsel argued that the FIR was lodged nearly two years and eight months after obtaining preliminary inquiry approval. The defence contended that her parents reside separately in Viramgam with independent incomes, and that her husband’s documented income of approximately ₹89 lakh as a police employee was ignored by investigators. The defence further argued that the 68.84% calculation by the ACB was hypothetical and based on faulty market-value estimates.

Opposing the plea, the public prosecutor argued that the accused faces severe charges of acquiring disproportionate assets and deliberately avoided ACB summons for months. The prosecution pressed for custodial interrogation to unearth the full scale of real estate purchases and financial transactions, urging the court to dismiss the bail plea in the interest of justice.