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

2025 Supreme(Mad) 2386

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M.Nirmal Kumar, J.
State Bank of India, Represented by its Regional Manager - Petitioner
Versus
Central Bureau of Investigation and ors. - Respondents
W.P.No. 10887 of 2025
Decided On : 09-04-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Nithyaesh Natraj
For the Respondent: Mr. K.Srinivasan, Special Public Prosecutor

Fraud and cheating in loan processing does not require prior notice to the accused before FIR registration; immediate action is essential to uphold justice and public interest.

Headnote:(A) Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - Section 17(A) - Writ Petition for direction to Central Bureau of Investigation to register FIR on a complaint involving fraudulent loan agreements - The court emphasized that principles of natural justice do not apply at the stage of reporting a criminal offence and immediate action is necessary in fraud cases. (Paras 5 and 8)

(B) Loan Processing and Valuation - Collusion between borrowers and valuers inducing the bank to sanction loans based on inflated property valuations causing substantial financial loss to the bank - The bank's failure to follow internal guidelines during loan processing led to accountability issues for officials involved. (Paras 7 and 8)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner, the Regional Manager of State Bank of India, sought to compel the CBI to register an FIR regarding significant fraud involving inflated property valuations and collusion between borrowers and bank officials. The matter concerns a substantial loan sanctioned against a non-performing asset. (Paras 1 to 5)

Findings of Court:
The court concluded that the complaints warranted immediate registration of an FIR due to the serious nature of the alleged fraud and previous precedent supporting such action in similar cases. (Paras 9 and 10)

Issues: The primary issue was whether the CBI was obligated to act on the complaint for FIR registration despite previous communication referencing natural justice principles incorrectly. (Paras 4 and 5)

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the requirement to provide an opportunity for the accused before registering an FIR does not apply in cases of fraud, emphasizing swift action to prevent evasion of law by suspects. (Paras 5 and 6)

Result: Writ Petition allowed, directing CBI to register FIR. (Para 10)

Table of Content
1. background of the complaint against borrowers. (Para 1 , 2)
2. petitioner's arguments on fir registration delay. (Para 3 , 4)
3. court's observations on procedural correctness. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9)
4. order directing fir registration. (Para 10)

ORDER :

M.Nirmal Kumar, J.

The petitioner, Regional Manager of State Bank of India, Chennai South Zone, West Tambaram, Chennai filed this Writ Petition seeking direction to the respondent/Central Bureau of Investigation to register First Information Report (FIR) on the basis of the complaint, dated 27.07.2023 lodged by the petitioner.

2. Gist of the complaint, dated 27.07.2023 is as follows:

(i) The petitioner, Regional Manager of State Bank of India, Regional Business Office, Tambaram, Chennai is the controller of State Bank of India, Meenambakkam Branch. He has been authorized to lodge complaint under the Regulations 76 & 77 of State Bank of India General Regulations, 1955 which are statutory. The Retail Assets Central Processing Centre (In short "RACPC") is a Loan Processing Cell of the State Bank of India looking after the processing, sanctioning and disbursement of diversified credit facilities such as housing loan, education loan, mortgage loan etc. The RACPC also undertakes the end-to-end facilitation viz., preparation of appraisal, pre-sanction and post-sanction/pre-disbursement inspections, documentation and account maintenance for all kinds of credit facilities sanctioned till closure of accounts.

(ii)One Mr.Krishnan running a rice mill in the name of M/s.Thamaraiselvi Hitech Rice Mill, Karimedu, Pallipattu, Thiruvallur District. He represented himself to be in the business since 2009. He approached the State Bank of India, Meenambakkam Branch along with his wife Mrs.K.Thamarai Selvi and applied for Housing Term Loan of Rs.5.22 Crore and SBI Suraksha Loan of Rs.27.60 lakhs. Based on their representation and documents produced, Housing Term Loan (HTL Account No.38153499150) for Rs.5.22 Crore and SBI Suraksha Loan (Account No.38161919064) for Rs.27.60 lakhs were sanctioned on 29.12.2018 and 08.01.2019 for purchase of plot situated at Door.No. 19140, Natesan Street, Block No.9, Ward No.C, Zamin Pallavaram, Chengalpet District and constructions thereon with a total project cost of Rs.699.43 lakhs. The Borrowers purchased the said property for a sale consideration of Rs.6 Crore by sale deed dated 09.01.2019 and registered as document No.209 of 2019 with the Sub Registrar Office, Pallavaram. The Borrowers created equitable mortgage in favour of the Bank by depositing the original title deeds of the property and executed a Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deeds dated 25.09.2019. The Bank undertaken due diligence in the form of pre-sanction inspection, Title Investigation Report and took two independent valuation of the property by engaging empaneled professionals. Upon clearance of Title and Valuation, the loan facilities sanctioned to the Borrowers. The Borrowers failed to repay the loan, due to which, the account became Non-Performing Assets (NPA) on 15.05.2021. Thereafter, the Screening Committee at Administrative Office, Chennai verified the documents and found that the panel valuer Mr.A.P.Radhakrishnan entrusted with the valuation of the property gave a report dated 26.11.2018 and valued the property to the tune of Rs.6.26 Crore and the another panel valuer Mr.P.Muthuselvan gave a valuation of Rs.6.02 Crore by his report, dated 12.02.2018. Believing the reports to be genuine, the Bank sanctioned Housing Loan of Rs.5.22 Crore on 29.12.2018 and disbursed an amount of Rs.4.50 Crore on 29.12.2018 for purchase of the plot. Thereafter, the sale deed in favour of the Borrowers Mr.Krishnan and his wife Mrs. Thamarai Selvi registered disclosing the sale consideration as Rs.6 Crore and the Vendor M/s.MPR Constructions Private Limited acknowledged the sale consideration.

(iii)It was found that the Borrowers loan account became sick and classified as NPC on 15.05.2021. The Bank i

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
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