Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
SAURABH BANERJEE
Lalit Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Central Bureau Of Investigation – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition seeks to challenge framing of charges (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. petitioner argues lack of evidence and liability (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. court outlines standards for framing charges (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 4. guidelines for quashing proceedings established (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 5. suspicion regarding petitioner's involvement identified (Para 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 6. no requirement to accuse company; vicarious liability does not arise (Para 16) |
| 7. petition dismissed, charges sustained (Para 17 , 18) |
JUDGMENT :
SAURABH BANERJEE, J.
1. By way of the present petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, Hereinafter referred to as ‘Cr.P.C.’, the petitioner seek setting aside of the order dated 07.09.2022 passed by the learned Special Judge (PC Act) (CBI)-07, Rouse Avenue Court, New Delhi, Hereinafter referred to as ‘Trial Court’ in CC No.375/2019 whereby charges were framed against the petitioner under Section 120B read with Sections 420 /468/471 of the Indian Penal Code, Hereinafter referred to as ‘ IPC ’ and under Section 13(2) read with Section13(1)(d) of the Prevention of corruption Act, Hereinafter referred to as ‘PCAct
2. Briefly encapsulated, based on a written complaint
The court affirmed that a director's criminal liability cannot be presumed without direct evidence of involvement in fraudulent activities; mere involvement in a company implicated in fraud is insuff....
The court established that a lack of prima facie evidence warrants quashing of criminal proceedings, emphasizing the limited scope of judicial review under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.
The court upheld that charges under criminal conspiracy can be framed based on prima facie evidence, and the burden is on the prosecution to show substantial suspicion to proceed to trial.
At the discharge stage, the court must determine if there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused based on the prosecution's evidence, without conducting a mini-trial.
Point of Law : custodial interrogation is also necessary not only for protecting the interests of the bank but in the interest of public at large who deposit their hard earned money in the banks.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that at the stage of consideration of charge, an accused cannot rely on materials by way of defense, and the power under Section 482 of the Code of....
The court can quash criminal proceedings if the allegations do not make out a case against the accused, as per the guidelines in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal.
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
