IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO.1933 OF 2024 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 2990 OF 2024 Bank of India Specialized Asset Recovery Management Branch, Bank of India Building, Mezzanine Floor, 70-80 MG Road, Fort, Mumbai 001 ... Applicant Versus IN THE MATTER OF:

Kishore Biyani, an individual, Indian Inhabitant, Adult, Occupation: Business, 406, Jeevan Vihar, Manav Mandir, Mumbai 400 006 ...Petitioner Versus

1. Bank of India Specialized Asset Recovery Management Branch, Bank of India Building, Mezzanine Floor, 70-80 MG Road, Fort, Mumbai 400 001.

2. BDO India LLP Level 9, North West Wing, The Ruby, 29, Senapati Bapat Marg, Dadar West, Mumbai- 400 028.

3. Future Retail Limited Through its Resolution Professional Mr. Vijay Kumar Iyer, having its address at 2^nd Floor, Future Group Office, SOBO Brand Factory, Pandit Madan Mohan Malviya Marg, Cross Road, Haji Ali, Tardeo, Mumbai-34 ...Respondents.

Mr. Cyruz Ardeshir, with Mr. Shriraj Khambete and Mr. Naman Jain, for the Applicant-Bank of India.

Mr. Umang Thakar, i/b Desai and Diwanji, for Respondent No.2.

Mr. Ashishi Kamath, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Ameet Naik, Mr. Tushar Hathiramani i/b Madhu Gadhodia, Ms. Anisha Nair and Mr.

Udit Mehta, for Petitioner/Respondent in Application.

CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE &

DR.NEELA GOKHALE, JJ.

RESERVED ON : 13th FEBRUARY 2025 PRONOUNCED ON : 18^th FEBRUARY 2025 JUDGMENT : (Per Dr. Neela Gokhale, J.)

1) The Petitioner essentially assails the forensic report dated 9^th August 2023 prepared by the Respondent No.2- BDO India LLP, a Chartered Accountant’s Firm. According to the Petitioner, the Respondent No.2-Firm is appointed by the Respondent No.1-Bank of India to conduct a forensic audit of the Respondent No.3-Company, which is currently under the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (‘CIRP’). The Petitioner is an erstwhile director of the Respondent No.3-Company (now under suspension)

2) By order dated 25^th September 2023, the Petitioner was granted leave to amend the prayer clause, to challenge the show-cause notice dated 17^th August 2023, issued by the concerned Committee of the Respondent No.1-Bank of India. Notice was issued to the Respondents. Meeting the challenge of the Petitioner to the Forensic Audit Report (‘FAR’), it was submitted on behalf of the Respondent No.2 that the impugned FAR was an interim report and the final report was submitted to the Respondent No.1-Bank of India . However, since it was the contention of the Petitioner that he was not aware of any such final FAR nor was a copy provided to him so far, this Court directed that the said report shall not be acted upon till the next date.

3) Pursuant to the order dated 25^th September 2023, the Petition was amended and the prayer (d-1) and was added seeking to quash and set aside the letter/show-cause notice dated 17^th August 2023, addressed by the Respondent No.1-Bank of India to the Petitioner.

4) Today when the matter was taken up for hearing, at the very outset, Mr. Cyruz Ardeshir, learned counsel appearing for the Respondent No.1-Bank of India submitted that the Bank is willing to withdraw the show-cause notice dated 17^th August 2023 calling upon the Petitioner to provide written submissions on the FAR dated 9^th August 2023, since the show-cause notice was alleged to be based on the interim FAR dated 9^th August 2023. Mr. Ardeshir submits that now the auditors have completed the forensic audit and the final FAR dated 15^th September 2023 is submitted to the Bank. He seeks liberty to initiate proceeding against the Petitioner afresh by following the due process of law.

5) Mr. Aashish Kamath, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Petitioner insists that the FAR itself be set aside on the ground that the forensic report on the basis of which the show-cause notice was issued was inconsistent and based on incomplete information. He says that the Respondent No.3-Company of which the Petitioner was a promoter is under the CIRP and henc