SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Del) 4650

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Amit Sharma, J.
Avinash Jain – Appellant
Versus
Central Bureau of Investigation – Respondent
Bail Appln. 583 of 2023 & Cr.M.(BAIL) 274 of 2023
Decided On : 18-05-2023

Advocates appeared:
Mr. Vikas Pahwa, Senior Advocate with Mr. Mudit Jain, Mr. Pratyansh Pandey, Mr. Arun Kanwa, Ms.Namisha Jain & Mr. Rudraksh Nakra, Advocates, for the Petitioner.
Mr. Anupam S. Sharma, Special Public Prosecutor, CBI with Mr. Ripudaman Sharma, Ms. Harpreet Kalsi, Mr.Prakarsh Airan and Mr. Abhishek Batra, Advocates, for the Respondent.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 120B, 420, 468, 471 - Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - Section 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) - Default bail application - FIR registered alleging diversion of bank funds and fraudulent activities by a company and its directors - Chargesheet filed under IPC provisions but incomplete as it did not cover the offences under the PC Act, leaving ongoing investigation unresolved - Right to bail under Section 167(2) triggered as statutory limits for filing chargesheet were not met adequately regarding all offences - Further investigation needed before submission of complete chargesheet is rejected by the court; applicant granted bail. (Paras 1, 4, 6, 12, 28, 39, 43)

Table of Content
1. application for bail and basis of fir (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4)
2. details regarding arrest and charge sheet (Para 5 , 6 , 11)
3. challenges against the charge sheet presented (Para 12 , 15 , 16)
4. court's observations on the ongoing investigation (Para 18 , 19 , 20 , 21)
5. discussion on section 17a of the pc act (Para 22 , 23 , 24)
6. constitutional implications of personal liberty under article 21 (Para 28 , 29 , 30)
7. court's verdict on the alleged incompleteness of the charge sheet (Para 31 , 32 , 33)
8. final decision allowing default bail (Para 34 , 35 , 36)

JUDGMENT

Amit Sharma, J.

1. The present application under Section 439 read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (`CrPC') seeks the following prayers:

    "A. Pass necessary orders and directions, thereby directing for grant of statutory/default bail to the Petitioner and directing for the release of the Petitioner from custody in FIR bearing No. RC2232020A0009 dated 19.11.2020 u/s 120B r/w 420, 468 and 471 of the IPC and 13(2) r/w 13 (1) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 registered by CBI, ACV, New Delhi, on such terms and conditions as may deem fit and proper.

AND

    B. Pass necessary orders and directions, thereby setting aside the order dated 10.02.2023 passed by the Ld. Trial Court in the matter titled as `CBI vs. M/s Arise India Ltd.' in IA No. 1/23 in CBI Case No.10/2023 pertaining to FIR bearing No. RC2232020A0009 dated 19.11.2020 u/s 120B r/w 420, 468 and 471 of the IPC and 13(2) r/w 13 (1) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 registered by CBI, AC-V, New Delhi.

AND

    C. Pass any other necessary and appropriate orders and direction, as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice."

Background

2. The present FIR was registered on the basis of a complaint received from S. Bavani Sankaran, Deputy General Manager, State Bank of India, SAMB-I (`SBI') on behalf of a consortium of six banks alleging that M/s Arise India Ltd. (`the company') and its directors, including the present applicant alongwith other unknown public servants availed credit facilities from the said consortium of banks led by the SBI and diverted the borrowed funds for purposes other than those for which they were released. The loan account of the company was declared as a Non-Performing Asset (`NPA') by the SBI on 27.02.2017 and subsequently by other banks in the consortium, with a total outstanding amount of Rs. 512.67 Crores. After a forensic audit, the account of the company was declared as a `fraud' by the SBI on 27.05.2019.

3. On the basis of the aforesaid complaint, the present FIR was registered against M/s Arise India Ltd., Avinash Jain (applicant herein), Virender Mishra, Rajnish, unknown public servants and other unknown private persons under Section 120B read with Sections 420, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (`IPC') and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (`PC Act') for causing wrongful loss of public money on 19.11.2020. The applicant was arrested on 14.11.2022 in the said FIR for offences under Section 120B read with Sections 420, 468 and 471 of the IPC and Section 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the PC Act. He was produced before the learned Special Judge on 15.11.2022 and remanded to judicial custody for one day. Thereafter, after five days in police custody granted vide order dated 16.11.2022, he was remanded to judicial custody on 21.12.2022. The CBI filed a chargesheet, dated 30.12.2022, on 06.01.2023 qua the applicant and other accused persons under Section 120B read with Sections 420 and 471 of the IPC and substantive offences thereof. In the said chargesheet, it was stated that further investigation was continuing in terms of Section 173(8) of the CrPC.

4. An application for default bail under Section 167(2) of the CrPC was moved on behalf of the applicant herein on 01.02.2023, which was dismissed vide order dated 1

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top