Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
Central Bureau Of Investigtation, Through Supdt. Of Police, Banking Securities Fraud Branch, New Delhi – Appellant
Versus
Ashok Kumar Raheja, S/o. Sh. Ram Chand Raheja – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J.
1. Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, has been filed on behalf of the Petitioner CBI seeking setting aside of Order dated 09.04.2021 of the learned Special Judge (PC Act) (CBI) – 02 Delhi, whereby the Petitioner/CBI had been directed to provide a copy of the Request Letter issued to the Complainant Bank seeking sanction for prosecution of the Respondent and also to provide draft Sanction Letter if supplied by CBI to the Complainant Bank, while seeking sanction to prosecute the Respondent (accused).
2. Briefly stated, case RCBD12015E0006/CBI/BS&FC/DLI was registered against Respondent on 19.05.2015, on the basis of written Complaint dated 27.04.2015 received from Mr. D.C. Kar, Regional Manager, Indian Overseas Bank, Regional Office, Chandigarh. As per the allegations in the Complaint, during the period 2008 onwards, M/s Green Valley Plywood Ltd., Mr. Jagmohan Kejriwal, Chairman & Managing Director, Mrs. Anju Kejriwal, the then Director, M/s G.R. Bansal & Co. through its Partner Mr. G.R. Bansal, and other unknown public servants of Bhiwani Stand, Rohtak Branch and Connaught Place Branch of Indian Overseas Bank, and o
The Court ruled that documents not relied upon by the prosecution during the charge framing stage are not to be disclosed to the accused; issues related to the validity of prosecution Sanction arise ....
Accused cannot seek documents to prove innocence at the stage of framing charges under Sec. 91 of Cr.P.C.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the accused's entitlement to seek production of documents under Sec. 91 would ordinarily not come till the stage of defense, and the expressio....
Repeated litigation on issues already settled by the court constitutes an abuse of process, reinforcing the validity of prior rulings on matters like sanction for prosecution.
Prosecution must supply list of unrelied-upon documents to accused under Section 91 CrPC for fair trial, even pre-defence stage if necessary, overriding confidentiality claims for public documents.
Sanction for prosecution of public servants must reflect independent assessment; repeated refusals by the authority, absent new evidence, undermine legitimacy of prosecution.
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
