Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J.
Sunny Bathija Through Wife As Parokar – Appellant
Versus
Central Bureau of Investigation – Respondent
Bail Appln. 271 of 2023, Crl. M.A. 2272 of 2023
Decided On : 12-04-2023
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background of bail application and fir details. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. petitioner's defense and arguments for bail. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 3. submissions highlighting procedural and evidential concerns. (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33) |
| 4. prosecution’s arguments detailing evidence and alleged involvement. (Para 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61) |
| 5. court's observations on bail principles in economic offences. (Para 63 , 64 , 65 , 66 , 67) |
| 6. court's conclusion on granting bail and conditions imposed. (Para 83 , 84 , 85 , 86) |
JUDGMENT
Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J.
INDEX
| S.I. Nos. | PARTICULARS | PARAGRAPHS NOS. |
| A | PREFACE | 1 to 4 |
| B | AVERMENTS MADE IN BAIL APPLICATION | 5 to 20 |
| C | SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER | 21 to 33 |
| D | SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF CBI | 34 to 62 |
| E | FINDING & ANALYIS | 63 to 82 |
| F | CONCLUSION | 83 to 86 |
(A) PREFACE
1. The present bail application has been moved on behalf of Sunny Bathija through his wife as Parokar under Section 439 read with Section 482 Cr. P.C. in FIR No. RC2242022A0001 dated 20th June 2022 under Section 120B/409/420/477-A of IPC R/w 13(2) and 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1998 registered by CBI.
2. The factual matrix of the case in brief is that the present FIR No. RC 2242022A0001 was registered by Respondent-CBI, AC-VI, New Delhi on 20.06.2022based on a written complaint dated 11.02.2022 of Sh. Vipin Kumar Shukla, DGM & Branch Head, Union Bank of India, Nariman Point, Mumbai against M/s Dewan Housing Finance (hereinafter referred to as `DHFL'), Kapil Wadhawan, the then Chairman & Managing Director of DHFL, Dheeraj Wadhawan, Director of DHFL, Shri Sudhakar Shetty, M/s Amaryllis Realtors LLP (hereinafter referred to as `ARLLP'), M/s Gulmarg Realtors LLP (hereinafter referred to as `GRLLP'), M/s Skylark Buildcon Pvt. Ltd., M/s Darshan Developers Pvt. Ltd., M/s Sigtia Constructions Pvt. Ltd., M/s Creatoz Builders Pvt. Ltd., M/s Township Developers Pvt. Ltd., M/s Shishir Reality Pvt. Ltd., M/s Sunblink Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. and other unknown persons including public servants for the commission of offences punishable u/s 120-B r/w 409, 420 & 477A of IPC and Section 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of PC Act, 1988 (as amended in 2018). As per the status report, the allegations as made out in the FIR are that the co-accused Kapil Wadhawan and Dheeraj Wadhawan in conspiracy with others were involved in siphoning off public funds. It has been stated that the modus operandi of the Wadhawan brothers, was that they lent significant amounts of loans ranging in hundreds of crores to different entities owned/controlled by different individuals including their own employees in the garb of corporate loans and later on siphoned the same for their own personal gains and creation of assets in their own names and/or in the names of their family members/entities related to them. It has been stated that some of the funds were also routed to foreign countries for the creation of such assets. Using this modus operandi, Kapil Wadhawan and co-accused Dheeraj Wadhawan, in pursuance of a larger criminal conspiracy involving other persons as well, caused a loss of Rs.334000 crores approx to the consortium of 17 banks.
3. After investigation, CBI filed the charge sheet in the Court of Learned Special Judge (P.C. Act), CBI-08, Rouse Avenue Court, New Delhi on 15.10.2022. CBI stated in the charge sheet that further investigation is ongoing against numerous other persons and entities and the supplementary charge sheet will be filed later on.
4. The bail application moved by the present petitioner was dismissed by the learned Special Judge (P.C. Act), CBI-08, Rouse Avenue Court, New Delhi vide a detailed 19.12.2022.
(B) AVERMENTS MADE IN BAIL APPLICATION
5. In the bail application, at the outset, it has been stated that that the present accused was not named
Bail in economic offences should be denied to protect the larger public and state interest and prevent tampering with witnesses.
In serious fraud cases, bail may be denied due to substantial allegations, criminal antecedents, and flight risk, despite long custody periods.
Economic offences require a cautious approach during bail considerations, balancing individual rights and public interest due to their profound impact.
The gravity of an offence is a factor to be considered when granting bail, but it is not the only criterion. Other factors to be considered include the stage of the investigation, the nature of the e....
The court emphasized the importance of balancing personal liberty with the interest of society and considered the legal principle of mens rea in the context of the petitioner's alleged involvement in....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
