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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Bom) 3158

BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Central bureau of investigation – Appellant
Versus
Sunil bajaranglal Varma – Respondent
REVN 583 / 2024



IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 583 OF 2024 Central Bureau Of Investigation …Applicant Versus Sunil Bajaranglal Varma & Anr. ...Respondents ………….

Mr. Kuldeep S. Patil, a/w. Mr. Dhavalsinh V. Patil and Ms. Sanika V. Joshi, Advocates for the Applicant – CBI.

Mr. Aabad Ponda, Senior Advocate a/w. Mr. Ashutosh Thipsay, Mr. Omkar Mulekar and Ms. Sakshi Jogdand, Advocates for the Respondent no.1.

Mr. K.C.Shinde, APP for Respondent No.2 - State.

CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.

DATED : 28th APRIL, 2025.

P. C. :

1. The present revision application is preferred by applicant /CBI challenging the orders dated 20.07.2024 and 26.07.2024 passed by CBI Special Court (supplementary charge-sheet) in case No. 641 of 2024 in Special Case No. 38 of 2018. The first order dated 20.07.2024 is passed below Exhibit-51, it was an application preferred by the applicant / CBI seeking police custody remand of the accused No.22 i.e. respondent No.1. The second impugned order dated 26.07.2024 is passed below Exhibit-55 on application preferred by applicant / CBI for arrest of the respondent No.1.

2. It is prosecution’s case that on 05.02.2018 Mr. Avneesh Nepalia, Deputy General Manager of Punjab National Bank, Zonal Office, Mumbai, filed written complaint against Gokulnath Shetty, Deputy Manager of Punjab National Bank and 15 other persons under Section 120-B r/w. Section 409, 420 of Indian Penal Code and Section 13(2) r/w. 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short “P.C.Act”) and substantive offences thereof. Thereafter, on 22.02.2018 and 04.03.2018 Punjab National Bank gave additional complaints. It is alleged that during the period from year 2015 to year 2018, all accused mentioned in complaint conspired together to defraud the Punjab National Bank (for short “PNB”) by fraudulently issuing letter of Undertaking (LOU) / Foreign Letter of Credit through Accused No.3 M/s. Geetanjali Gems Ltd., accused No.4 M/s. Gili India Ltd., accused No.5 M/s. Nakshtra Brands Ltd., by dishonestly misrepresenting and submitting documents to the bank and misappropriating funds of bank. Total loss caused to PNB is around Rs.7,080 Crores. Allegations against the respondent No.1 is that he has played active role in said fraud at behest of the accused No.6 (Mehul Chokshi).

3. It is contention of learned Special Public Prosecutor for the applicant that respondent No.1 is an accused in the fraud committed with PNB to the tune of Rs.7080.86 Crores. During investigation it is revealed that the respondent No.1 has played an active role in commission of the present crime. He was international head of M/s. Gitanjali Group of Companies and he was party to the criminal conspiracy at the behest of Shri. Mehul Chokshi, (accused No.6). The respondent No.1 has established overseas dummy companies and controlled their activities. He was actively involved in circular trade transactions between Hong Kong based entities viz. M/s. Crown Air Ltd., M/s. 4C’s Diamond Distributors and M/s. Shanyao Gong SI Limited and Gitanjali Group of companies in India. He used to pass instructions to the dummy Directors, Partners, Authorised Signatories of Hong Kong based companies on regular basis. The banking, accounts, inventory, shipping operations and LC documentation work and dismantling of jewellery were being done on his instructions at the behest of Shri. Mehul Choksi (accused No.6). Learned Special P. P. further submitted that in supplementary charge-sheet the respondent No.1 is shown as absconding and provision of further investigation is kept open. After filing supplementary charge-sheet, summons was served on father of the respondent No.1 as respondent No.1 was settled in U.S.A. with his family. When the respondent No.1 failed to appear after service of summons, NBW was issued against him. Thereafter, the respondent No.1 approached this Court for cancellation of NBW by filing criminal Writ Petition. During the hearing o

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top