Directors cannot be held vicariously liable for company crimes absent active role, criminal intent or statutory provision; no conspiracy without meeting of minds; discharge warranted if no prima facie material links accused.

JUDGMENT :

RAKESH KAINTHLA, J.

1. The petitioner has filed the present petition for quashing of the order dated 06.7.2024, passed by learned Special Judge (CBI), Shimla (learned Trial Court), vide which the application filed by the petitioner (accused before the learned Trial Court) seeking her discharge was dismissed. (Parties shall hereinafter be referred to in the same manner as they are arrayed before the learned Trial Court for convenience.)

2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present petition are that the CBI filed a charge sheet before the learned Trial Court against the accused for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 120B read with Sections 420, 467, 468, and 471 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 13 (1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (PC Act). It was asserted that the promoters of M/s Resource Food Private Ltd. had dishonestly availed a grant in aid of Rs.9,00,00,000/- (nine crores) from the Ministry of Food Processing Industries (MoFPI) Government of India for setting up an Integrated Cold Chain Project for the total cost of Rs.21,00,00,000/- (twenty one crores) at village Rajgarh, Post office Shambhu, Tehsil, Rajpura, District Patiala, Punjab, New Delhi in the year 2012; however, they misutilised the funds in connivance with the promoters of M/s Hillcrest Foods and certain unknown Government officials. They assembled a dismantled the plant and machinery of M/s Hillcrest Foods set up in the year 2010-2012 at village Bersan Post Office Manjholi, Tehsil Nalagarh, District Solan, after availing a grant-in-aid of Rs.7,00,00,000 (seven crores) for setting up of an integrated cold chain project from MoFPI. An expression of interest was floated by MoFPI on 7th May 2012. Shri Jaswinder Singh (A5), an employee of Praveen Dewan (A2), at the instance of his employer, forged the signatures of Shri Lawrence Peris (A3), purported Director of M/s Resource Food Pvt Ltd and submitted a proposal and various documents to MoFPI to avail the grant-in-aid. The petitioner is a Director of M/s Resource Food Private Limited, and she was part of a conspiracy to avail the grant-in-aid; hence, it was prayed that an action be taken against her and the other accused.

3. Learned Trial Court found sufficient reasons to summon the accused. When the accused appeared, she and the other accused filed an application seeking their discharge, asserting that there was insufficient ground to proceed against them. The charge sheet did not disclose the commission of any cognizable offence. The chargesheet was based on hearsay evidence. The prosecution suppressed the original document lying in the possession of MoFPI. Witnesses were shown the photocopies, and they expressed their opinions based on the photocopies alone. The report of the handwriting expert was also based on the photocopies. The photocopies are inadmissible in evidence. The specimen handwriting was taken without following the procedure prescribed under Section 311A of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC). The investigating officer was not competent to obtain the signatures of the accused. The officers of MoFPI were not charged, and the chain of conspiracy failed. Hence, it was prayed that the accused be discharged.

4. The application was opposed