BAIL APPLN. 4330/2021 Page 1 of 48

$~4

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

Judgment reserved on: 09.09.2022

Judgment pronounced on: 08.02.2023

+

BAIL APPLN. 4330/2021 & CRL.M.(BAIL) 1514/2021

RAMAN BHURARIA

..... Petitioner

Through:

Mr. Arshdeep Singh Khurana, Mr.

Ayush Agarwal, Mr. Harsh Mittal,

Advocates

versus

DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT

..... Respondent

Through:

Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Mr. Vivek

Gurnani, Advocates for ED

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH

J U D G M E N T

:

JASMEET SINGH, (J)

BAIL APPLN. 4330/2021

1.

The present application is filed under Section 439 IPC read with

Section 482 CrPC seeking bail in ECIR/12/DLZO-I/2021 dated 30.01.2021.

2.

The applicant was arrested on the night of 12/13.08.2021 at 00:45 hrs.

in the abovementioned ECIR, and thereafter remanded to Police Custody

(PC) of the Enforcement Directorate (ED) for a period of 14 days until

25.08.2021.

3.

Thereafter, the applicant has been remanded to Judicial Custody (JC)

from time to time and continues to remain incarcerated in Judicial Custody

in Tihar Jail, Delhi.

Digitally Signed byAMIT

ARORA

Signing Date:08.02.2023

12:07:41

Signature Not Verified

BAIL APPLN. 4330/2021 Page 2 of 48

4.

The applicant had previously preferred two regular bail applications

before the learned Trial Court and both have been rejected vide orders dated

05.10.2021 and 01.11.2021 respectively.

5.

The brief facts giving rise to filing of the present bail application are

as under:

6.

On

31.12.2020,

the

CBI

registered

a

FIR

bearing

No.

RC0742020E0014 against M/s Shakti Bhog Foods Ltd. (hereinafter called as

SBFL) and Mr. Kewal Krishan Kumar, Director/ Promoter of M/s SBFL

under Section 120B read with Section 420/ 467/ 468/ 471 and 13(2) read

with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter

called as PC Act).

7.

The FIR was registered based on a written complaint dated

11.06.2020 lodged by the State Bank of India (SBI). The allegations in the

FIR pertain to financial irregularity and siphoning of funds in relation to

credit facilities obtained by SBFL from a consortium of banks led by the

SBI and thereby causing a loss of Rs. 3269.42 crores.

8.

The Ld counsel for the applicant states that the applicant was not

named as an accused/ suspect in the FIR. As per the FIR, the review

period/period under enquiry of offence was between 2013 and 2017.

9.

The applicant was an internal auditor of the SBFL for the financial

year 2008-09 till 2013-14, and a statutory auditor of SBFL for the financial

year 2006-07.

10.

In the column No.12 of the FIR, the observations of the I.O. read as

under:-

Digitally Signed byAMIT

ARORA

Signing Date:08.02.2023

12:07:41

Signature Not Verified

BAIL APPLN. 4330/2021 Page 3 of 48

11.

It is submitted that the findings of the I.O. clearly show that the

account of SBFL was declared NPA on account of commercial reason and,

more importantly, there are no apparent mala fides in the monitoring of the

account though there are some omissions/ instances of negligence.

12.

Based upon the FIR, the respondent Enforcement Directorate (ED)

filed the ECIR in which the applicant was not named as an accused.

13.

It is further submitted that before the learned ACMM, the respondent

ED on 25.01.2022 has made a statement that it needed two and a half

months for completing its investigation. Thereafter, on 22.04.2022, the

respondent requested for and was granted more time to complete its

Digitally Signed byAMIT

ARORA

Signing Date:08.02.2023

12:07:41

Signature Not Verified

BAIL APPLN. 4330/2021