Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sharad T Kabra vs Union Of India Thru.Central Bureau Of ... on 15 February, 2016
8
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH: BENCH AT INDORE
(SINGLE BENCH HON'BLE SHRI P.K. JAISWAL, J.)
M.Cr.C. No.10155/2015
SHARAD T. KABRA
V/s.
UNION OF INDIA
***************************************************
Shri Vikram Chauddhri, learned Senior counsel with Shri
Harshit Sethi, learned counsel for the applicant (Sharad T.
Kabra).
Shri Deepak Rawal, learned Assistant Solicitor General for
Union Bank of India.
Shri Anand Soni, learned counsel with Ms. Shradha Dixit,
learned counsel for the objector.
***************************************************
ORDER
(15.2.2016) This is first bail application for grant of bail filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. by the applicant, who is in custody in connection with Crime No.RC BD1/2014/E/0008, registered at police station - CBI, BS & FC, Delhi, for the offence punishable under Sections 120B read with Sections 467, 471 and 420, IPC. He is in custody since 30.6.2015.
2. A charge sheet bearing No.02/2015, was filed by the CBI on 29.5.2015 against co-accused - Vijay Madanlal Chaudhary, Tikamdas Kabra, Smt. Manjari Chaudhary, in the matter of availing Foreign Bank Guarantee Limit from the Union 8 Bank of India by mortgaging a plot of land at Indore, on the basis of a forged "No Objection Certificate", purported to have been signed by the lessee and his relatives, thereby causing a wrongful loss of Rs.63.78 crores to the bank and corresponding wrongful gain to themselves.
3. The allegation against applicant - Sharad Kabra, being the witnessed of notarization of the forged NOC was having the complete knowledge that the said consent letter is a forged one and thus he was the facilitator of the crime and he acted as such, in furtherance of the conspiracy with Shri Vijay Chaudhary and his wife Smt. Manjari Chaudhary, other co- accused, to commit the crime. The applicant was also one of the beneficiaries of the fraud on the bank as Director of M/s. Zoom Developers Pvt. Ltd. In furtherance to the said criminal conspiracy, applicant - Sharad Kabra, on 7.10.2006, fraudently and dishonestly, in the capacity of Company Secretary of M/s. Rajat Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., extended the Equitable Mortgage of the said plot of land, by way of deposit of title deed by constructive delivery, covering the enhanced Bank Guarantee Limit of Rs.35 crores, sanctioned to M/s. Zoom Developers Pvt. Ltd., owned by Vijay Madanlal Chaudhary and his wife Manjari 8 Choudhary.
4. After the cognizance of the said charge - sheet, a non-bailable warrant was issued against the applicant, Vijay Madanlal Choudhary, Manjari Choudhary and three other co- accused persons. Other co-accused persons, who are very influencive persons are absconding.
5. A case vide RCBD1/2014/E/0008/2013/A/0001 was registered in CBI, BS&FC, New Delhi, on the basis of a written complaint dated 24.11.2012 of the Union Bank of India, Andheri East Branch, Mumbai against M/s. Zoom Developers Pvt. Ltd. and its promoters Directors Vijay Madanlal Choudhary and others, in the matter of issuance of bank guarantees, based on the misrepresentations made by the company and its Directors. It was one of the allegations in the complaint of the Union Bank that the "No Objection Certificate" purportedly signed by Shri Manindra Chandrasen, in respect of plot at Indore and submitted by M/s. Zoom Developers is a forged one.
6. During investigation by the CBI, it was further revealed that a case vide No.499/2011, was already got registered by Shri Manindra Chandrasen, lessee of the plot, 8 against the applicant and others at police station Palasia, Indore, on the allegation of forgery of his signatures as well as of others, on the alleged "No Objection Certificate". This case was transferred to CBI, BS&FC, New Delhi.
7. On the basis of the aforesaid NOC and against the security of the plot of land at Indore, Union Bank of India, Andheri East Branch, Mumbai was induced to sanction and disburse three bank guarantees, amounting to Rs.34.50 crores approximately in favour of M/s. Zoom's Foreign Aggregator namely M/s. Llondenium Trading Ltd. After investigation in first information report of case RC/BD1/2013/E0001 and RC/BD1/2014/E/0008, two separate charge sheets have been filed in the concerned courts at Mumbai and Indore and the charges in both the charge - sheets are different.
8. As per charge sheet, a serious allegation has been made against the applicant and other co-accused persons who are absconding that they in conspiracy with each other forged the No Objection Certificate purportedly issued by the lessee of the plot and submitted it to the bank for the purpose of availing bank guarantee limit. The company M/s. Zoom Developers Pvt. Ltd. was being assessed by the Income Tax 8 Department at Indore and not by the Income Tax Department, Mumbai and most of the witnesses in the Special Case No.2/2015, filed at Indore are from Indore only. The applicant is a serious economic offender and is one of the accused who are charged of committing one of the biggest bank fraud cases in the recent past, the fraud of the magnitude of Rs.2750 crores. The total 13 criminal cases are pending, 8 by the CBI and 5 by the Enforcement Directorate.
9. Learned Senior counsel for the applicant has drawn my attention to FIR dated 14.8.2011, order dated 20.12.2011 passed in M.Cr.C.No.9253/2011, charge - sheet dated 1.1.2013, 29.5.2015 and submitted that, bank initially granted Rs.20 Crores bank guarantee facilities. Later, bank enhanced the group limit of Rs.35 Crores and then additionally credit facility of Rs.28.65 Crores was granted to M/s. Zoom Vallabh Steel Ltd. a group company of M/s. Zoom Developers Pvt. Ltd., and the Equitable Mortgage was extended to cover the aforesaid credit facilities also. M/s. Zoom Developers Pvt. Ltd., committed default in repayment of the said facilities and when the bank issued a notice to the lessees, directing them to vacate the said immovable property, the lessees informed the 8 bank vide their letter dated 12.2.2011 that they had not given any consent to any one, for the purpose of availing any loan from the bank. The bank did not accept the same and its officials forcibly evicted him from the said immovable property and took physical possession under SARFAESI Act, 2002. It is submitted that in the present case viz. RC BD1/2014/E/0008, the CBI has now filed a charge sheet before the learned Special Judicial Magistrate, (CBI & Economic Offences), Indore and as per the charge sheet the respondent had not identified the person who forged the 'consent letter' in question. The applicant is facing five connected trial in Mumbai, pertaining to the charge sheet filed by the CBI and one trial at Indore. He is having deep root and tentacle in society. In connected cases in which he is facing trial at Mumbai, he has been enlarged on bail. The trial of the offence registered under Section 120-B read with Section 467, 471 and 420, IPC will take considerable time and no custodial interrogation from the present applicant is required. He is relying on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra v/s. Central Bureau of Investigation, reported as 2012 (1) SCC (Cri) 26 and prays that application for grant of bail be allowed and applicant 8 be released on bail.
10. Per contra, learned ASG for the respondent - CBI as well as learned counsel for the objector vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail and submitted that the charges against the applicant and other co-accused persons are very serious in nature. Main accused persons are absconding and till today, they have not been arrested nor they have surrendered before the Special Judge. Offence / acts of cheating of applicant and others have caused a loss to the tune of Rs.2750 Crores to the public exchequer. The applicant is king pin and a master mind of the whole conspiracy and he is the only person who hatched conspiracy with the other Directors namely Vijay Madanlal Chaudhary of M/s. Zoom Developers Pvt. Ltd. for causing loss to the public exchequer to the tune of Rs.2750 Crores.
11. After rejection of the anticipatory bail application, he was absconding and was arrested only on 30.6.2015. The other co-accused persons whose application for grant of anticipatory bail has been rejected, they are still absconding. The offence under Section 467 is triable by the Sessions Judge. There was a wrongful lost of Rs.63.50 Crores to the bank and 8 in all the cases, the total amount comes to Rs.2750 Crores. It is a serious charge, supported by a detailed charged running into more than 300 pages. With the aforesaid, learned counsel for the CBI and objector prays for rejection of the application.
12. On due consideration of the facts and circumstances, so also looking to the nature and seriousness of the economic offence and its impact on the society are always important consideration in such cases. I am not incline to release the applicant on bail. Applicant is granted liberty to renew his prayer after the arrest of the other co-accused persons.
13. With the aforesaid liberty, M.Cr.C.No.10155/2015, filed by the applicant for grant of bail has no merit and is accordingly, dismissed.
(P.K. JAISWAL) JUDGE ss/-