9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (6) TMI 835X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in which no fraud is alleged. In these circumstances, the respondent (CBI) is directed to file a detailed reply/status report mentioning about the outcome of the two previous complaints dated 27.03.2019 and 23.05.2019 and as to whether complicity of any public servant was found during the previous two investigations. List on 30.07.2020 before the Roster Bench. - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNISH BHATNAGAR Petitioner: Mr. N. Hariharan, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Arshdeep Singh, Mr. Arjun Mukherjee and Mr. Ayush Agarwal, Advocates. Respondents: Mr. Mridul Jain, SPP for CBI with Insp. Chandradeep, SP Ashok Kumar, CBI, Ms. Ichchha And Advocate ORDER Crl. M.As.4923-24/2020 Exemptions allowed subject to just exceptions. The applications stand disposed of. W.P.(Crl) 645/2020 Crl. M.A. 4922/2020 1. The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, seeking the following reliefs:- a) Issue a Writ in the nature of Mandamus or any writ/order/direction quashing the impugned FIR No.RCBD1/2020/E/0002 dated 10.02.2020 registered under Section 120B r/w 420/467/468/471 IPC and Section 13(2) r/w Section 13(1) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and all the proceedings emanating therefrom; b) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... irs of banking transactions of ESL in terms of various circulars issued by the RBI, the CDR was approved vide Letter of Approval (LOA). It is averred that concerned representatives of the complainant banks were on the panel of the Empowered Group, which was responsible for approving the CDR Scheme of ESL. The said approval was made after due scrutiny and thorough investigation of all affairs and banking transactions of ESL as per the mandate of RBI in such cases. Therefore, the complainant banks were always aware of the financial transactions of ESL and found no fraud or misfeasance while approving the CDR in 2014. It is averred that under the approved restructuring proposal fresh corporate loans were extended to ESL for the purpose of acquisition of receivables charged at ESPL and for meeting liabilities/capital expenditure. It is averred that in the year 2014-15, as per the approved restructuring proposal, IDBI, J K Bank and Union Bank of India extended fresh corporate loans to ESL pursuant to the sanction letters. Axis Bank also extended a corporate loan for Rs.290 crores for the same purpose. It is averred that thereafter as per the directions of the CDR and sanction letters, E ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2020 issued partial modifications to the above circular dated 21.8.2019 after examining the legal framework, in view of the complexities and issues arising from different banking frauds. The CVC reiterated its advice for referring the complaints to the Board. It is further averred that on 6.2.2020 respondent no.2 filed another complaint with the respondent no.1-CBI despite filing previous complaints on the same allegations with the same agency which did not find any criminality in the allegations. 8. It is averred that on 10.2.2020 respondent no.1 registered the impugned FIR No. RCBD1/2020/E/0002 dated 10.2.2020 registered under Section 120B r/w 420/467/468/471 IPC and Section 13(2) r/w Section 13(1) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The petitioner, on 25.2.2020 had filed a representation with the CVC to bring to its knowledge the violation of its circulars/orders and to conduct an enquiry in the said violation by the respondent. 9. It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that FIR fails to make out any criminality against the petitioner. It is further argued that the corporate loan, in respect of which the allegations have been made were sanctioned to ESL after due ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o public servant has been named in the impugned FIR. Therefore, without the involvement of a specific public servant, there can be no applicability of the PC Act and jurisdiction of the CBI itself is not made out. 13. It is further argued that the previous complaints have been suppressed in the impugned FIR and a similar complaint was made in May 2019 with identical allegations which was investigated by the respondent-CBI and the same was returned to the complainant bank stating that it was not a fit case for registration of FIR. It is argued that subsequently a PE was initiated by the CBI in November 2019 which also did not culminate into an FIR as no criminality was found. It is further argued that one of the lender banks i.e Yes Bank had also filed a complaint to the EOW and again the same did not result into an FIR as no criminality was found in the allegations. It is further submitted that there are no specific allegations against the petitioner and he has been named as an accused as one of the Directors of ESL. It is further argued that the petitioner became a Director on 13.11.2013 and loan facilities as per the FIR have been advanced prior thereto and only facilities pursua ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... opining that it was not a fit case for registration of the FIR. 19. It has been vehemently argued by the Ld. Sr. counsel for the petitioner that despite two previous investigations by the authorities in the same transaction no role of any public servant could be figured out and despite that the present FIR has been registered U/s 13(2) r/w 13(1) (d) of the PC Act. It is further submitted by the Ld. Sr. Counsel for the petitioner that the respondent-CBI should clearly spell out in its counter affidavit as to whether the name of any public servant came out during the previous two investigations. In regard to this, it is submitted by the Ld. SPP for respondent-CBI who appears on advance notice that the investigation is in progress and the role of the public servants are being looked into. 20. It is also argued that RBI has constituted an Advisory Board for banking fraud and all the complaints by PSB‟s are to refer their complaints to the Advisory Board which according to the petitioner has not been done in the instant case and since the loans were disbursed by the person of the rank of GM and above and also the CDR was sanctioned by the authority of GM and above, it was incumben ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
