Manish Jain vs Reserve Bank of India - 2023 Supreme(Del) 3050

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(Del) 3050

MANMOHAN, MINI PUSHKARNA
Manish Jain – Appellant
Versus
Reserve Bank of India – Respondent

Advocates appeared:
Mr. Davinder N. Grover with Mr. Harsh Gupta, Advocates, for the Petitioner in W.P.(C) 6869/2019 & W.P.(C) 6883/2019.
Mr. Ramesh Babu with Ms. Manisha Singh, Ms. Nisha Sharma, Ms. Jagriti Bharti and Mr. Rohan Srivastava, Advocates, for the Respondent/RBI in W.P.(C) 6869/2019 & W.P.(C) 6873/2019 & W.P.(C) 6883/2019.
Mr. Vipin Jai with Mr. Ujjwal Goel, Advocates, for the Respondent No. 2/OBC in W.P.(C) 6869/2019.
Mr. Shreyas Mehrotra with Mr. Manish Kumar Mishra and Mr. Anant Roy, Advocates, for the Respondent No. 3 in W.P.(C) 6869/2019.
Ms. Reema Khorana with Mr. Vikash Kumar, Advocates, for the Respondent No. 5/Allahabad Bank in W.P.(C) 6869/2019 & for the Respondent no. 3/Central Bank of India in W.P.(C) 6883/2019.
Mr. Pankaj Vivek with Mr. Arjeet Gaur, Mr. Atul Tripathi and Mr. Himanshu Prakash, Advocates, for the Petitioner in W.P.(C) 6873/2019.
Ms. Mayuri Raghuvanshi with Ms. Jyom Raghuvanshi and Ms. Akanksha Rathore, Advocates, for the Respondent No.3 in W.P.(C) 6873/2019.
Mr. Anmol Mehta, Advocate, for the Respondent no. 2 and 5 in W.P.(C) 6883/2019.

JUDGMENT

Manmohan, J.: (Oral)--Present writ petitions have been filed challenging legality and validity of the circular dated 1st July, 2016 bearing number DBS.CO.CFMC.BC. No.1/23.04.001/2016-17 (Master Direction on Fraud) issued by the Respondent No.1-Reserve Bank of India to the extent it violates Article 14 of the Constitution of India as well as the decision/order of the Respondent-Banks declaring and categorising and reporting the accounts of the petitioner as `fraud'.

2. The Supreme Court in State Bank of India & Ors. Vs. Rajesh Agarwal & Ors., 2023 SCC OnLine SC 342 has held that the rule of audi alteram partem ought to be read in Clauses 8.9.4 and 8.9.5 of the Master Direction on Fraud. The relevant portion of the said judgment is reproduced hereinbelow:

"79. In light of the legal position noted above, we hold that the rule of audi alteram partem ought to be read in Clauses 8.9.4 and 8.9.5 of the Master Directions on Fraud. Consistent with the principles of natural justice, the lender banks should provide an opportunity to a borrower by furnishing a copy of the audit reports and allow the borrower a reasonable opportunity to submit a representation before classifying the acc

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2023 Supreme(Del) 3050

MANMOHAN, MINI PUSHKARNAManish Jain – AppellantVersusReserve Bank of India – Respondent

MANMOHAN, MINI PUSHKARNA
Manish Jain – Appellant
Versus
Reserve Bank of India – Respondent