Bombay High Court
Miten Anil Pandya vs The Central Beurau Of Investigation ... on 22 September, 2022
Author: Bharati Dangre
Bench: Bharati Dangre
1/8 910 ba-1618-21.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
BAIL APPLICATION NO.1618 OF 2021
Miten Anil Pandya .. Applicant
Versus
The Central Bureau of Investigation, .. Respondents
Bank Securities & Fraud Cell,
Mumbai & Anr.
...
Mr.Aabad Ponda, Senior Advocate with Rohan J. Sawant,
R.Bhatt and Gopal L. Dalvi for the Applicant.
Mr.H.S.Venegaokar for the CBI/Respondent No.1.
Ms.A.A.Takalkar, A.P.P. for the State/Respondent No.2.
...
CORAM: BHARATI DANGRE, J.
DATED : 22nd SEPTEMBER, 2022
P.C:-
1. The applicant is charged in RC.01(E)/2018 registered
with CBI, BS & FC, Mumbai, which invoke Sections 409, 420
read with 120-B of the Indian Penal Code (for short, "the IPC")
and Sections 13(1)(c) & (d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of
Corruption Act, 1988 (for short, "the PC Act").
In connection with the said C.R., he came to be arrested
on 04/03/2018 and since then, he remains incarcerated.
M.M.Salgaonkar
::: Uploaded on - 26/09/2022 ::: Downloaded on - 26/09/2022 22:11:49 :::
2/8 910 ba-1618-21.doc
2. The applicant is accused of being part of the criminal
conspiracy, cheating and criminal misconduct in connivance
with the public servants of Punjab National Bank (PNB), to
cause wrongful gain to Diamonds R US, M/s.Solar Exports,
M/s.Stellar Diamond and causing wrongful loss of Rs.280.70
crores to PNB in respect of 8 fraudulent letters of undertaking
(LOU).
The investigation reveals that the complainant bank vide
letter dated 13/02/2018, had informed CBI that accused
Gokulnath Shetty, in conspiracy with other accused persons,
including the partner of three accused frms, had dishonestly
and fraudulently, issued 150 LOUs to overseas branches of
Indian Banks before his retirement year in 2017, total
amounting to Rs.6498 crores approx, and the buyers credit
obtained against the said 150 LOUs had been siphoned off by
the accused persons. The frms and its partners had not
provided 100% cash margin, and thereby, PNB has been put to
wrongful loss of Rs.6498 crores approx.
On 31/01/2018, the complaint was lodged with the CBI
and CBI recorded the FIR vide CR No.RC.01(E)/2018, by
invoking offences punishable under Sections 409, 420 read
with 120-B of IPC and Sections 13(1)(c) & (d) and 13(2) of the
PC Act.
CBI conducted detailed investigation and on 14/05/2018,
fled the charge-sheet against the present applicant and other
co-accused.
M.M.Salgaonkar
::: Uploaded on - 26/09/2022 ::: Downloaded on - 26/09/2022 22:11:49 :::
3/8 910 ba-1618-21.doc
3. Learned senior counsel Mr.Ponda would rely upon an
order passed by this Court in Bail Application No.3124 of 2021
in case of the co-accused, Arjun Eknath Patil Vs. Union of India
& Anr. on 19/08/2022 and submit that the applicant is
similarly situated to the said Arjun Eknath Patil. Apart from
this, on merits it is submitted that the applicant has been
wrongfully arraigned as an accused and perusal of the charge-
sheet would reveal that the applicant has not received any
money or commission from the main accused, but as he was
merely working as an employee and closely associated with the
main accused, he is indicted in the crime.
It is further submitted that except co-accused Gokulnath
Shetty, the Manager of PNB, all other bank employees to whom
the CBI has assigned specifc role as the one who had complete
knowledge of alleged fraud, are already released on bail.
Apart from this, it is submitted that the applicant, was
working as Manager (Finance) in M/s.Firestar International
Pvt. Ltd., the company of Nirav Modi Group and whose
immediate boss is one Vipul Ambani (accused No.9), who was
President of Finance is also released on bail by the Sessions
Court and parity is sought to be drawn with Vipul Ambani by
the learned senior counsel, by submitting that the decisions of
utilisation of funds were done with the permission of Vipul
Ambani and it was he, who used to regularly visit PNB and
meet the bank offcials and was in regular touch with them. It
is also submitted that he ordered shifting of all the documents
to the offce of Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas, after the offence
was registered.
M.M.Salgaonkar
::: Uploaded on - 26/09/2022 ::: Downloaded on - 26/09/2022 22:11:49 :::
4/8 910 ba-1618-21.doc
Apart from this, long incarceration of the applicant for
last four years is also pressed into service as a ground for
release, with no likelihood of trial, being concluded at the
earliest.
4. I have heard learned counsel Mr.Venegaokar appearing
for the CBI, who would fall back on the affdavit fled by the
Additional Superintendent of Police, CBI on 06/09/2021.
Learned counsel would submit that the applicant was
working as Manager (Finance) in M/s.Firestar International
Pvt. Ltd. and he was aware of the fraudulent transactions
carried out by Nirav Modi and other co-accused, in
furtherance of the conspiracy and it is he, who played major
role in concealing the important documents, with an intention
to destroy them, by transferring them to the offce of the Law
Firm at Lower Parel in Mumbai. It is submitted that the
statements of PW 30 and PW 29 are to the effect that it was the
present applicant, who has brought the documents in the offce
in the night of 14/02/2018, pursuant to which, search was
carried out and voluminous documents came to be seized. It is
sought to be argued that the conduct of the applicant, which
has surfaced in the charge-sheet, reveal that he was directly
involved in committing disappearance of the evidence and
Section 201 of IPC has been attracted.
Parity as sought, is denied with Vipul Ambani on the
ground that, the applicant is directly involved in concealment
of incriminating documents/articles, with an intention to
destroy them, in connivance with the main accused Nirav
Modi and Nehal Modi and the documents seized from the Firm,
M.M.Salgaonkar
::: Uploaded on - 26/09/2022 ::: Downloaded on - 26/09/2022 22:11:49 :::
5/8 910 ba-1618-21.doc
included the original applications for LOUs, Airway bills, bills
of entry and copies of swift messages, relating to LOU.
5. Pertinent to note that co-accused Manish Bosamiya, who
was attributed a major role came to be released on bail by this
Court in Bail Application No.3786 of 2021, where by referring
to the accusations levelled against the accused persons,
submission of long incarceration coupled with staggering
progress of trial, being taken note of. Recording that there are
about 150 witnesses to be examined and there are 30 accused
in the case, the learned Single Judge of this Court (Coram :
Prakash D. Naik, J.), by relying upon the decision of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India Vs.
K.A.Najeeb1, released him on bail on account of he being in
custody for four years and three months.
6. Relying upon the said order, co-accused Arjun Eknath
Patil was also released on bail in the light of the same analogy
that the trial is likely to consume considerable time with 150
witnesses to be examined and he was incarcerated since
20/02/2018.
7. As far as the present applicant is concerned, the role
attributed to him has clearly surfaced through the charge-
sheet and he has been accused of being responsible for
transferring the documents to the offce of the Law Firm in
order to destroy the evidence. The material to that effect is
already compiled in the charge-sheet and though he face the
accusations of being acting in connivance with the main
accused persons and having knowledge of conspiracy for
1 2021(3) SCC 713
M.M.Salgaonkar
::: Uploaded on - 26/09/2022 ::: Downloaded on - 26/09/2022 22:11:49 :::
6/8 910 ba-1618-21.doc
illegally transmitting the LOUs and cheating the PNB by a
clandestine operation, since the co-accused are released on
bail, I see no reason, why the present applicant should
continue to be incarcerated, when he also suffers incarceration
from 04/03/2018.
8. With the presumption of innocence of an accused till
proven guilty, the onus is on the prosecution to bring home the
guilt of an accused. This being a cardinal principal of law,
acknowledged throughout the world coupled with a right of
accused for a speedy trial, which has been well accepted as a
facet of Article 21. Prolonged delay in culmination of the trial
will not justify the indefnite incarceration of the accused,
however, serious the nature of accusations may be with no
exception to economic offences. Once investigation is complete
and charge-sheet is fled, presence of the accused in custody is
not necessary, though he may be tried for the charges, he face.
On this count, I am satisfed that the applicant deserve
his release on bail, on the ground of his long incarceration,
awaiting the culmination of trial.
9. Needless to state that the observations made above are,
prima facie, in nature and limited to the extent of adjudication
of the present application and the learned Judge trying the
applicant for the offences with which he is charged, shall not
get infuenced by the above observations, in any manner.
: ORDER :
(a) Application is allowed.
M.M.Salgaonkar
::: Uploaded on - 26/09/2022 ::: Downloaded on - 26/09/2022 22:11:49 :::
7/8 910 ba-1618-21.doc
(b) Applicant - Miten Anil Pandya shall be released
on bail in connection with C.R.No.RC.01(E)/2018
registered with CBI, BS & FC, Mumbai (Special case No.37/2018) on furnishing P.R. Bond to the extent of Rs.1,00,000/- with one or more sureties in the like amount.
The applicant shall be released on cash bail of Rs.1,00,000/- for a period of four weeks in lieu of sureties. During the said period, the applicant shall arrange for the sureties.
(c) The applicant shall report to CBI, Banking & Finance, Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai once in a month i.e. on frst Tuesday of the month between 11.00 a.m. and 1.00 p.m. for the frst three months; and, thereafter, once in three months i.e. frst Tuesday between 11.00 a.m. and 1.00 p.m., till further orders.
(d) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing the facts to Court or any Police Offcer. The applicant shall not tamper with evidence.
(e) The applicant shall deposit his passport before the Special Court.
(f) The applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of the trial Court.
M.M.Salgaonkar
::: Uploaded on - 26/09/2022 ::: Downloaded on - 26/09/2022 22:11:49 :::
8/8 910 ba-1618-21.doc
(g) The applicant shall regularly attend trial, on
every date, unless he is exempted.
(h) On being released on bail, the applicant shall furnish his contact number and residential address to the Investigating Offcer and shall keep him updated, in case there is any change.
( SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J.) M.M.Salgaonkar ::: Uploaded on - 26/09/2022 ::: Downloaded on - 26/09/2022 22:11:49 :::