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

2017 Supreme(Gau) 99

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, ASSAM, NAGALAND, ARUNACHAL PRADESH AND MIZORAM
RUMI KUMARI PHUKAN, J.
Satish Kumar Kalra, son of Rattan Lal Kalra – Petitioner
Versus
Central Bureau of Investigation and Ors. – Respondents
Criminal petition 418, 529, 582, 825, 826, 813, 760 of 2014, and criminal revision 415 of 2014
Decided On : 03-02-2017

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners:Mrs. S Sarma, Ms. NM Deka, Ms. P Mazumdar, Mr. AK Bhuyan, Ms. B Bhuyan, Ms. P Pathak, Ms. N Choudhury, Ms. B Bora, Mr. S Borgohain, Mr. NJ Gogoi, Ms. B Devi, Mr. P Choudhury, Advocates
For the Respondent:Mr. P.K. Kalita, Advocate, Mr. G.J. Saikia, Advocate, Mr. K.R. Borooah, Advocate, Mr. PN Choudhury, Sr. Retainer Counsel

Headnote:

Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 420 , 120 B and 306 - Central Vigilance Commission Act, 2003 - Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - Section 13(1)(d), (2)(d) and 13(1)(c) - Defrauding the bank - Charge-sheet - Complaint was filed by Circle Head, Punjab National Bank with Superintendent of Police, CBI on against all above petitioners for allegedly defrauding the bank - In said complaint, it has been submitted that one of Directors M/s Double Dee Construction Private Limited, (engaged with business of construction of works) namely filed a loan application on with Punjab and National Bank, Branch mentioning that Company has already availing credit facilities of CC limit of 9 crores and BG Limit of 20 crores from Indian Oversees Bank, Dispur (in short IOB) against collateral security of landed property and said Double Dee Construction Private Limited requested Punjab Bank Authority with credit facility for execution of work order for availing cash credit facility of Rs.6 crores and Bank Guarantee of Rs.20 crores - Credit proposal approved by said Credit Committee was finally sanctioned - Branch Manager with connivance with empanelled valuer who inflated value of property of said construction company to facilitate party to avail higher limit and exposed Bank to loss of Rs.15.22 croes – Held, Accused petitioners who were earlier granted pardon by the court submitted in their affidavit that they are still ready to give statement but there was no direction on part of court to give their statement for which they are unable to give any evidence - It is true that unless directed accused persons are not in a position to give their statement - Impugned order dated being an irregular order is liable to be interfered with and subsequent order dated has no sanctity of law as indicated above is not maintainable - Equally orders passed in between above two orders are also liable to be interfered with - Accordingly all orders passed from as it relates to matter of pardon are hereby quashed and set aside - All petitioners are directed to appear before trial court on or before and learned trial court will hear matter of pardon afresh by giving full opportunity to prosecution to submit its opinion as regards necessity of pardon - All petitions are disposed of accordingly.

JUDGMENT AND ORDER :

1. All the above batch of cases arising out of same FIR and Charge-sheet, hence they are taken up together and disposed of by this common order.

2. A complaint was filed by the Circle Head, Punjab National Bank with the Superintendent of Police, CBI, Kolkata on 27.1.2012 against all above petitioners for allegedly defrauding the bank. In the said complaint, it has been submitted that one of the Directors M/s Double Dee Construction Private Limited, (engaged with business of construction of works) namely, Jitu Goswami, filed a loan application on 10.2.2009 with the Punjab and National Bank, Bhangagarh Branch mentioning that the Company has already availing credit facilities of CC limit of 9 crores and BG Limit of 20 crores from the Indian Oversees Bank, Dispur (in short IOB) against collateral security of landed property at Guwahati and the said Double Dee Construction Private Limited requested the Punjab Bank Authority with the credit facility for the execution of the work order for availing cash credit facility of Rs.6 crores and Bank Guarantee of Rs.20 crores. In the process of credit opinion from IOB, Dispur Branch it was reported on 26.2.2009 that the account M/s Double Dee Construction Private Limited was declared as NPA. But the Branch Manager of PNB Mr. P.K. Kataky inspite of knowing the credit opinion that the loan A/c turned NPA, recommended the proposal to the Circle Office. The loan proposal was processed by the Circle Credit Committee comprising of P.Chakma (Sr. Manager), Janak Raj Dhawan (Chief Manager RMD), Shri N.C. Barman (Chief Manager Credit) who recommended the sanction of the aforesaid limit as proposed by the said Construction Company, by waiving insurance of stock, and various other primary security. The credit proposal approved by the said Credit Committee was finally sanctioned by Shri S.K. Kalra (Circle Head PNB). The Branch Manager P.K.Kataky with connivance with empanelled valuer Mr. M. Pathak who inflated the value of property of the said construction company to facilitate the party to avail the higher limit and exposed the Bank to loss of Rs.15.22 croes. That apart said Mr. P.K.Katkay obtained blank CIBIL report against M/s Double Dee Construction Private Limited by furnishing wrong name only to suppress the factual credit worthiness on the part of the Company and said intentional procedural lapse was overlooked by the Circle Credit Committee and the sanctioning authority headed by Shri S.K. Kalra (Circle Head PNB). Thus after committing all procedural lapse on the part of the Bank Officers the loan was sanctioned on 31.3.2009 and disbursement of CC Limit as well as issuance of BG was started from 7.4.2009. The Circle Head PNB Mr. S.K. Kalra inspite of advise from CVO to stop exposer in the loan A/c of said M/s Double Dee Construction Private Limited allowed to disburse the limit to the said party, without any public interest.

3. In pursuance of sanctioned of limit by the PNB a tripartite agreement was executed among the Bank (PNB), M/s Double Dee Construction Private Limited and M/s Lanco Infratech Limited (who undertake to make all payment due to the M/s Double Dee Construction Private Limited) to the PNB by way of cheque, but, however no payment was made to the Bank as per the agreement. In the meantime, Bank Guarantee (BG) amounting to Rs.9,61,98,839/- was issued and invoked by M/s NBCC Limited due to failure of M/s Double Dee Construction Private Limited to execute the contract. The borrower could not make any repayment against CC Limit of Rs.6 crores and BG Limit of 10 crores and account was declared as NPA on 27.5.2010 which resulted wrongful loss to the PNB to the tune of Rs.15.22 crores.

4. By lodging the aforesaid complaint the Circle Head PNB requested the CBI to lodge a criminal case against those persons and cause a detail investigation to bring the culprit to just






































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

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