Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
K.LAKSHMAN
N. Somasekhar Rao – Appellant
Versus
Central Bureau of Investigation, Economic Offences Wing, P.S.Chennai, represented By its Public Prosecutor – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. allegations of bank fraud through inflated property valuations (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. details of fraudulent activities leading to loan acquisition (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 3. grounds presented for quashing proceedings (Para 11) |
| 4. responses to petitioner’s allegations (Para 12 , 13) |
| 5. legal references supporting arguments (Para 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 6. court's analysis of specific allegations against the petitioner (Para 17 , 19 , 20) |
| 7. precedents regarding valuation and professional conduct (Para 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 8. rejection of professional negligence defense (Para 26 , 27 , 28) |
| 9. emphasis on prima facie evidence for proceeding (Para 29 , 30 , 31) |
| 10. conclusion affirming dismissal of the criminal petition (Para 32 , 34 , 35) |
ORDER :
K. Lakshman, J.
Heard Mr. G. Vidya Sagar, learned Senior Counsel representing Mr. Mamidi Avinash Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Srinivas Kapatia, learned Special Public Prosecutor for CBI appearing for 1st respondent and M/s. Pearl Law Associates appearing for respondent No.2.
2. The present Criminal Petition is filed under Section – 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, ‘CrPC’) by the petitioner to quash the proceed
The court upheld that specific allegations of fraudulent conduct can sustain criminal charges against a property valuer providing inflated valuations to facilitate loan approvals.
A lack of prima facie evidence for conspiracy negates the framing of criminal charges against a bank valuer who submitted inflated property valuations.
The court has the power to shift and weigh the evidence at the stage of framing of charge to determine whether a prima facie case against the accused has been made out.
The absence of tangible evidence to establish any connection or collusion between the petitioner and other co-accused persons for defrauding the bank led to the quashing of the proceeding against the....
A lawyer can be held criminally liable for providing false legal opinions if it is established that they knowingly participated in a fraudulent scheme, and the mere act of providing legal advice does....
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
