Indian Bank vs Steel Hypermart India Pvt. Ltd.

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2024 Supreme(SC) 1308

ABHAY S. OKA, AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH
Indian Bank – Appellant
Versus
Steel Hypermart India Pvt. Ltd. – Respondent

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR, Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR, Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv., Mr. Devanshu Yadav, Adv., Mr. Sahil Sharma, Adv.
For the Respondent: Mr. Sudhanshu S Chaudhari, Sr. Adv., Mr. Satish Rai, Adv., Mr. K.P. Singh, Adv., Mr. Diwakar Shukla, Adv., Mrs. Abhay Gupta, Adv., Mr. Yogesh Khanduja, Adv., Mr. Praveen Swarup, AOR, Mr. Sudhanshu S Choudhary, Sr. Adv., Mr. Satish Rai, Adv., Mr. KP Singh, Adv., Mr. Abhay Gupta, Adv., Mr. Yogesh Khanduja, Adv., Mr. Diwakar Shukla, Adv., Mr. Ashish Singh, Adv., Mr. Aayush Gupta, Adv., Mr. Pranjal Chapalgaonkar, Adv., Mr. Sadashiv, AOR, Mr. Vikramjeet Banerjee, A.S.G., Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR, Mr. Digvijay Dam, Adv., Mrs. Swati Ghildiyal, Adv., Mr. Merusagar Samantaray, Adv., Mr. Pratyush Shrivastava, Adv.

ORDER :

1. Leave granted.

2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.

3. A case was registered by the Central Bureau of Investigation, Banking Securities Fraud Branch on 10th January, 2021 against the respondents and others for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 468, 471 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, ‘the IPC’) and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short, ‘the P.C. Act’). A petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, ‘the Cr.P.C.’) was filed for quashing. By the impugned judgment, the High Court has allowed the said petition.

4. Learned senior counsel appearing for the appellants has taken us through the impugned judgment. The submission is that only on the footing that the Review Committee is dealing with the case afresh, the High Court has quashed the First Information Report (FIR) without even adverting to the nature of the offences alleged against the respondents. It is submitted that only on the basis of certain circulars, the impugned order has been passed. Moreover, he pointed out that in the petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. filed by the respondents,

Click Here to Read the rest of this document