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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 58553

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA
Mr. KORRAPATI SUBBAIAH – Appellant
Versus
The Central Bureau of Investigation Through ACB Hyderabad – Respondent
CRLP 14937/2025



##PAGE1##

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAD

THE HON’BLE SMT.JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA

CRIMINAL PETITION No.14937 of 2025

Date: 29.12.2025

Between:

Korrapati Subbaiah

… Petitioner/Accused No.1

And

The Central Bureau of Investigation,

Through ACB, Hyderabad,

Rep. by the Public Prosecutor,

High Court for the State of Telangana,

Hyderabad and another

... Respondents

ORDER:

This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioner-accused No.1

seeking to quash the proceedings in CC No.5914 of 2023 on the file

of XXI Additional Judicial Magistrate cum Special Court of

Sessions, Hyderabad, registered for the offence under Section 120-

B read with Sections 420, 464, 467, 468 and 471 IPC.

2. Heard Sri G.V.S. Nagesh, learned counsel for the

petitioner and Sri Srinivas Kapadia, learned Special Public

Prosecutor for CBI appearing for the respondent No.1.

##PAGE2##

2

ETD,J

Crl.P. No.14937 of 2025

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the

allegations made against the petitioner are utterly false and that the

petitioner is a civil contractor and has obtained loans from the

banks, after obtaining the legal opinion on the documents submitted

by him. Now, the de facto complainant cannot allege any fraud

against the petitioner. The Bank Authorities have properly evaluated

the documents and after obtaining the legal opinion from the panel

Advocates only, loan was sanctioned to the petitioner. Learned

counsel has further submitted that if all the documents are alleged

to be forged and fake, then the authorities involved in giving the

legal opinion and sanctioning the loan, also could have been

implicated in the case, but the Bank Officials are not included in

these proceedings, which itself shows the falsity in the allegations.

He further submitted that the documents were being sent by the

prosecuting agency to the Central Forensic Science Laboratory

(CFSL), wherein it was held that the questioned signatures are

tallied with the admitted signatures, thus the same disproved the

case of the prosecution and he further submitted that there is no

truth in the allegation that the petitioner has siphoned away huge

amounts, because no such amounts were diverted to his own

##PAGE3##

3

ETD,J

Crl.P. No.14937 of 2025

account. He, therefore, prayed to quash the proceedings against

the petitioner.

4. Learned Special Standing Counsel for CBI has submitted

that each and every document produced before the Bank is a

forged document and that the prosecution could collect voluminous

documents in this case to prove the offence of forgery against the

petitioner herein. The CFSL report clearly reveals the element of

forgery and the act of forgery committed by the petitioner herein.

The argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the

CFSL report disproves the case of the prosecution is not supported

by any material. He further submitted that, with the documents

collected by the prosecuting agency and with the material evidence

on record, the offences against the petitioner are bound to be

proved. He, therefore, prayed to dismiss the petition.

5. Perused the record.

6. The record discloses that the petitioner-accused No.1 has

availed credit facilities with Syndicate Bank, Chandanagar Branch

to an extent of Rs.10.00 crores against the primary and collateral

securities and accused No.4 stood as a guarantor and

subsequently, accused No.1 committed default in repayment of the

##PAGE4##

4

ETD,J

Crl.P. No.14937 of 2025

loan and thus, the account was declared as NPA. On enquiry, it is

realized that the petitioner has submitted fake sub-contract

agreement, non-existent work orders in conspiracy with his vendors

accused Nos.12, 3 and 4 mortgaged the assets, which are non-

existent and further has siphoned off the borrowed funds which

resulted wrongful loss to the Bank to a tune of Rs.12.30 crores and

wrongful gain for themselves. In the vigilance investigation

conducted by the Bank, there were serious irregularities and lapses

committed by accused Nos.9 to 11 and further it is alleged that

accused No.2 submitt

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