The court emphasized the right to bail based on substantial incarceration and the principle of parity, finding that serious charges under IPC were not prima facie established against the applicant.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 406, 409, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 477-A, and 120-B - Bail application - Applicant seeks bail in two FIRs related to economic offences involving substantial financial fraud against banks - Allegations include falsification of accounts and conspiracy to cheat banks, causing losses of Rs.35 Crores and Rs.1056.25 Crores respectively - Applicant has undergone significant incarceration of 3 years & 8 months and 2 years & 9 months - Court considers the principle of parity with co-accused granted bail and the right to speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution. (Paras 1-16)

(B) Bail - Conditions - Applicant granted bail on furnishing bonds and required to report monthly to the EOW, cooperate with the trial, and not tamper with evidence. (Paras 16-17)

Facts of the case:
The applicant is implicated in two FIRs for economic offences involving loans from banks, with allegations of falsifying accounts and conspiracy leading to significant financial losses.

Findings of Court:
The court finds a prima facie case against the applicant for lesser offences and considers the substantial period of incarceration already served.

Issues: The main issues include the applicability of serious charges under IPC and the applicant's right to bail based on prior rulings and the principle of parity.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the applicant's allegations do not meet the prima facie threshold for the most serious charges, and substantial incarceration warrants consideration for bail.

Result: Applications allowed.

JUDGMENT :

(MANISH PITALE, J.)

1. Heard Mr. Joshi, learned counsel for the applicant and Ms.Ambekar, learned APP for the respondent-State in both the applications.

2. The applicant in both the applications is the same individual and he has approached this Court seeking bail in two different FIRs registered against him and other accused persons.

3. The applicant is seeking bail in connection with C.R.Nos.36 of 2020 and 47 of 2020 registered by Economic Offences Wing (EOW), Mumbai. Initially, they were registered as FIR No.154 of 2020 dated 12.11.2020 with Cuffe Parade Police Station and FIR No.313 of 2020 dated 11.12.2020 with MRA Marg Police Station respectively. Both the FIRs have been registered for offences under Sections 406, 409, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 477-A read with 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC). The applicant is one of the accused persons. He was an internal auditor of Cox and Kings Limited (CKL).

4. On the basis of the complaint filed by the Complainant Smt. Vidya Sadashiv Shetty of Laxmi Vilas Bank against M/s Cox and Kings, Anthony Good, Urshila Kerkar, Ajay Ajit Peter Kerkar, Pesi S. Patel, Mahalinga Narayanan, Subhash Nautiyal Sagar Deshpande and others in connection to the loan of Rs.35 Crores obtained from Complainant Laxmi Vilas Bank for the period between November 2018 to 2019 and failed to repay the same and as the mentioned Accused with conspiracy presenting bogus documents with the Complainant Bank and cheating the complainant bank caused losses to the Complainant bank to the tune of Rs. 35 Crores Principal Amount.

4A. Similarly, on the basis of the complaint filed by the Complainant Mr. Prakash Prabhakar Rao of Axis Bank Ltd. against M/s Cox and Kings, Anthony Good, Urshila Kerkar, Ajay Ajit Peter Kerkar, Pesi S. Patel, Mahalinga Narayanan, Subhash Nautiyal Sagar Deshpande and others in connection to the loan of Rs.1056 Crores obtained from Complainant Axis Bank for the period between December 2011 to 2019 and failed to repay the same and as the mentioned Accused with conspiracy presenting bogus documents with the Complainant Bank and cheating the complainant bank caused losses to the Complainant bank to the tune of Rs. 1056.25 Crores.

5. CKL defaulted on statutory payments, including payments towards GST and TDS. On 27.06.2019, CKL filed a disclosure with the Stock Exchanges, informing that it had defaulted in repayment of commercial papers aggregating to Rs.150 crores. It came to light that CKL had started defaulting in repayment of loans and other such facilities extended by other banks also. In that context, on 15.07.2019, a Steering Committee was formed of the Indusind Bank, Complainant Bank, YES Bank and State Bank of India. In October 2019, proceedings were initiated before the National Company Law Tribunal against CKL for claims to the extent of about Rs.270 crores. A Forensic Auditor i.e. Pricewaterhouse Cooper was appointed by the Steering Committee of the Banks in August 2019. The interim report was received in December 2019 and eventually, the final report of the auditor was also submitted. These reports indicated widespread diverting of monies as financial facilities extended by banks and financial institutions, including the complainant bank to CKL. These monies were diverted to entities owned and operated by the accused persons, including the applicant. It is in this backdrop that the aforesaid FIR was registered and investigation was undertaken.

6. Upon the charge-sheet being filed for the aforesaid offences, the role of the applicant was stated specifically and this included an allegation of falsification of accounts along with co-accused person Anil O. Khandelwal, who was the Chief Financial Officer (CFO) of CKL. It was further alleged that certain amounts were paid to the applicant and this could be said to be the amounts received by the applicant for having indulged in the illegal activity of falsification of accounts. The applicant was arrested in connection with C.R.No.36 of 20