Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 17, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Dr. Vishwanath Sridhar Prabhu vs The State Of Maharashtra on 5 May, 2021

Author: Prakash D. Naik

Bench: Prakash D. Naik

Ethape                              1                               BAst-4957-2020


     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
            CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
              BAIL APPLICATION (St.) NO. 4957 OF 2020
                              WITH
               INTERIM APPLICATION NO.26 OF 2021
Dr. Vishwanatha Shridhar Prabhu                             .. Applicant
                 Vs.
The State Of Maharashtra                            .. Respondent
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr.Ashok Mundargi, Senior Counsel a/w. Mr. Mithilesh
Mishra i/b. Law Competere Consultus, Advocate for Applicant.
Smt. P.P. Shinde, A.P.P. for the State-Respondent.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                          CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.
              DATE OF RESERVED : 25th MARCH, 2021
            DATE FO PRONOUNCED : 05TH MAY, 2021
PC.
1.        The applicant had preferred this application for bail
under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. in connection with C.R. No. 375
of 2019 registered with Bhandup Police Station, Mumbai for
the offence punishable under Sections 201, 406, 409, 420,
465, 467, 471 and 477-A read with 120-B of Indian Penal
Code (for short "IPC") and Section 46(1), 47(A) of Banking
Regulation Act, 1949. The investigation was then to EOW
banking (ii) vide C.R. No. 86 of 2019. The applicant was
arrested on 12.03.2020.

2.       The brief facts of prosecution case are as under:

      (a)        The FIR was lodged by Jasbir Singh Matta, Manager
      of Recovery Cell, Punjab and Maharashtra Co-operative



     ::: Uploaded on - 07/05/2021               ::: Downloaded on - 10/09/2021 08:22:32 :::
 Ethape                                    2                                BAst-4957-2020


     Bank Limited (PMC Bank) being authorised by the
     Administrator appointed by Reserve Bank of India (RBI).

     (b)       The PMC Bank is registered under the provisions of
     Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. The bank
     was granted license to carry on banking business by RBI
     in 1984. The bank received scheduled status in 2000 and
     became Multi-State Co-operative Bank in 2004. The
     conduct of banking business by the PMC Bank is subject
     to the provisions of Banking Regulation Act, 1949 and the
     directions/ guidelines issued by RBI.

     (c)       It was learnt from the records that, the Managing
     Director         of     the   bank       Mr.Joy     Thomas            and       other
     functionaries including Board of Directors executives of
     the bank and promoter of HDIL have connived to commit
     illegal acts/offences. Some of the loans mainly belonging
     to HDIL group companies were intentionally given to cause
     wrongful gain to HDIL and its promoters, at the cost of
     wrongful loss to the bank and its depositors. The records
     were fabricated/falsified to conceal irregularities. Wrongful
     acts of the management/bank have resulted in risk of
     depositors losing their money.

     (d)       The         bank    in   their   regulatory          reporting           had
     understated the actual exposure of certain bad loan
     accounts/ which in the normal course should have been




   ::: Uploaded on - 07/05/2021                        ::: Downloaded on - 10/09/2021 08:22:32 :::
 Ethape                            3                            BAst-4957-2020


     disclosed and classified as Non-performing Assets (NPA's)
     as per RBI norms. The bank was reporting to RBI as
     suppressed information of actual loans accounts with
     huge exposure and deliberately replaced them with
     fictitious accounts. The borrowers in this loan accounts
     and the functionaries of the bank, were suspected
     beneficiaries.

     (e)       In the advances master indent for the year ended
     31st March, 2018 submitted to RBI, the bank had replaced
     44 loan accounts during individual balance outstanding
     was higher with 21049 fictitious loan account, whose
     individual outstanding was comparatively lower.

     (f)       Preliminary assessment by interim RBI inspection
     conducted by RBI revealed that, 10 out of 44 borrowers
     accounts of HDIL group companies revealed that balance
     outstanding on 31st March, 2019 was Rs.4355.46 Crores
     and the balance outstanding as on 31st August, 2019 was
     Rs.4635.62 Crores. The actual financial position of the
     bank was camouflaged and the bank dis-actively shows its
     rosy pictures of its financial parameters, thus encouraging
     more depositors to open account with bank to their
     detriment and also the fabrication /falsification affected
     the depositor's interest adversely.




   ::: Uploaded on - 07/05/2021            ::: Downloaded on - 10/09/2021 08:22:32 :::
 Ethape                                   4                             BAst-4957-2020


     (g)       The perpetrators of the fraud viz. Manager, other
     functionaries, Board of Directors of HDIL and PMC Bank
     connived with each other. In furtherance of criminal
     conspiracy           facilitated   huge    lending      to     HDIL        group
     companies and other entities which were concealed from
     RBI and depositors to dupe the regulators, depositors and
     others. The management and persons responsible for
     conduct of the business of the bank, are liable to be
     prosecuted for conspiracy, criminal breach of trust,
     cheating, forgery, falsification of records etc.

     (h)       In terms of provisions of Banking Regulation Act,
     1949        every       Chairman,       Managing    Director,         Director,
     Auditor, Manager and any other employee of the bank
     were liable to be prosecuted for preparing incorrect
     documents with intent to cause damage to the interest of
     depositors.

     (i)       During the period from 2008 to 2019 the accused
     committed act of criminal conspiracy, cheating, criminal
     breach of trust, forgery and falsification of records. Mr. Joy
     Thomas, Managing Director of PMC Bank alongwith
     Waryam Singh and other Board of Directors of PMC Bank,
     other bank officials and Mr. Sarang Wadhwan, Rakesh
     Wadhwan, Kuldeep Singh Wadhwan and other person of
     HDIL, executives of Somerset Constructions Pvt. Ltd.,
     Serveall Construction Pvt. Ltd., Sapphire Land Developer



   ::: Uploaded on - 07/05/2021                    ::: Downloaded on - 10/09/2021 08:22:32 :::
 Ethape                                 5                          BAst-4957-2020


      Pvt Ltd. Emeralds Realtors Pvt. Ltd. Awas Developers and
      Constructions Pvt. Ltd., Prithvi Realtors and Hoteld Pvt.
      Ltd and other executives affiliated bank and related person
      caused wrongful loss prima-facie to the tune of Rs.4355
      Crores to PMC Bank.

      (j)        About 15 persons were arrested. The arrested
      accused            includes   Rakeshkumar    Wadhwan,              Sarang
      Wadhwan (Executives HDIL) Joy Thomas, MD, PMC Bank,
      Waryam Singh Chairman PMC Bank. Surjeetsingh Arora,
      Director of PMC Bank, Ketan Lakadawalla (Auditor PMC
      Bank) Jayesh Singhani, Auditor PMC Bank, Anita Kirdat,
      Auditor PMC Bank, Rajneet Singh, Director PMC Bank,
      Mukti Bavisi, Director PMC Bank, Dr. Trupti Suhas Bane,
      Director PMC Bank, Jasvindar Singh Banwait, Director of
      PMC Bank, Vishwanath Prabhu, Shripad Jere (Valuers of
      PMC Bank), Surjeet Singh Narang, Brij Bhushan Handa,
      Omprakash Utpal, Director of PMC Bank.

      (k)        Statement of witnesses were recorded. Charge-
         sheets were filed.

3.       The applicant preferred an application for bail before the
Sessions Court which was rejected by order dated 30.04.2020.
Applicant thereafter preferred an application for bail before the
Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate. The said application
was rejected by order dated 19.06.2020. The applicant




     ::: Uploaded on - 07/05/2021             ::: Downloaded on - 10/09/2021 08:22:32 :::
 Ethape                                      6                            BAst-4957-2020


thereafter preferred another application for bail before the
Sessions Court which was rejected on 25.09.2020.

4.        Learned Senior Advocate Mr. Ashok P. Mundargi urged as
follows:-
(i)       The applicant is one of the Director of M/s.Yardi Prabhu
          Consultants and Valuers Pvt. Ltd. The said company was
          acting as consultants and property valuers for their
          clients. The applicant being a Chartered Accountant was
          assigned the job of secretarial practice, since he was not
          qualified for valuation of properties. He is not qualified
          civil/mechanical engineer. Other Directors were assigned
          job of conducting valuation of property.                  The applicant
          was not assigned work of valuation of immovable
          property. At no point of time he has carried out valuation
          of any immovable property of Punjab and Maharashtra
          Co-operative Bank (for short "PMC") or its borrowers. He
          has not signed any valuation report.

(ii)      Even if the allegation of prosecution are accepted, that is,
          false valuation reports were issued by company in favour
          of main accused to conceal their illegalities or to show
          credibility of PMC Bank, it cannot be said that the
          applicant           has     conspired   with   main         accused           for
          defrauding PMC Bank. There is no evidence to show that
          the applicant has received any share from defrauded
          amount.



       ::: Uploaded on - 07/05/2021                  ::: Downloaded on - 10/09/2021 08:22:32 :::
 Ethape                                 7                         BAst-4957-2020


(iii)      The allegation against the applicants are vague.                  It is
           alleged that the company of applicant was entrusted with
           task of valuation of properties of PMC Bank and its
           borrowers and it has revalued the property of PMC Bank
           and over valued the properties.

(iv)       One of the allegation is that flat No.603 situated at
           Chembur was valued at Rs.69.02 lakhs on 15.10.2011
           and it was revalued on 18.09.2017 showing value of
           Rs.134 lakhs and further revalued for Rs.163 lakhs. The
           valuation of 2011 in respect to the said flat was based on
           48% completion. The valuation of 2017 was based on full
           completion but still on lower end due to demonetization
           effect. The valuation of 2019 was based on market price
           nearly two years after previous valuation and considering
           parking and since flat was well equipped and maintained
           the value was substantially increased. The Investigating
           officer does not understand the technicality of the
           valuation report.

(v)        Mrs. Jyotsna Srivastav from PMC Bank had enquired
           about value of property over e-mail dated 31.07.2018
           with Mr. Jeevan Yerulkar to know the value of property
           and did not ask for revaluation report and hence Value of
           Rs.163 lakhs was informed to the Bank as per valuation
           report dated 28.06.2018 but signed copy of the report
           was not provided in 2018 and latter based on the request



        ::: Uploaded on - 07/05/2021         ::: Downloaded on - 10/09/2021 08:22:32 :::
 Ethape                                        8                             BAst-4957-2020


          through e-mail of May 2019, the report was sent on
          12.06.2019 with a submission acknowledgement of
          July/August 2018.                 It is not back dated report. The
          valuation of 2018 was submitted in 2019.

(vi)      Co-accused Shripad Jere has received desktop valuation
          report of the property in question at Rs. 7.76 Crores. The
          applicant has no role in issuing desktop valuation report.
          It was an unsigned and unstamped draft report.

(vii) The desktop valuation report cannot be considered as
          valuation report since it is merely a draft forwarded on e-
          mail        dated           03.04.2019   to   PMC      Bank         for      their
          confirmation. The said report was neither finalised nor
          signed by any authorized signatory of Yardi Prabhu
          Consultants & Valuers Pvt. Ltd. and it was not submitted
          to PMC Bank.

(viii) It is not alleged that the applicant or its company is the
          beneficiary of the fraud committed by co-accused.

(ix)      Section 120-B cannot be invoked against the applicant.
          There is no evidence to substantiate the charge under
          Sections 406, 409 of IPC against the applicant. Sections
          467, 468 are not attracted against the applicant.

(x)       The applicant is Chartered Accountant and Financial
          Analyst of the balance sheet and intangible assets, while



       ::: Uploaded on - 07/05/2021                     ::: Downloaded on - 10/09/2021 08:22:32 :::
 Ethape                                     9                              BAst-4957-2020


          valuation reports were created by Jeevan Yerulkar who is
          property valuer for tangible assets.

(xi)      Valuation was carried out by M/s. Suvishwa Valuers &
          Consultants Pvt. Ltd. which is an associate concern and
          of     which         Mr.Jeevan   Yerulkar      was        Director         from
          22.10.2007 and based on valuation conducted by him,
          M/s.Yardi Prabhu Consultants issued valuation report.
          The applicant is not Director of PMC Bank. He has no
          connection with the Bank.            He has not given valuation
          report. He is not responsible for any act committed by the
          employee of his company.

(xii) FIR is silent on the role of applicant.                        The applicant
          cannot be held responsible for the valuation submitted to
          PMC Bank.

(xiii) The valuation was based on fair market value.                                   The
          valuation reports are required to be contradicted by
          authorized person. There is no such material on record to
          show that the valuation reports are incorrect.                               The
          Investigating Agency has drawn adverse inference without
          any basis.

(xiv) Learned counsel for the applicant pointed out the
          statements of Smt. Manjeet Kaur recorded on 12.02.2020
          and 20.02.2020, statement of Jeevan Yerulkar dated
          23.01.2020 and statement of Rajesh Mehta recorded on



       ::: Uploaded on - 07/05/2021                   ::: Downloaded on - 10/09/2021 08:22:32 :::
 Ethape                                  10                            BAst-4957-2020


         03.06.2020. It is submitted that statements of these
         witnesses are not sufficient to substantiate the case of
         the prosecution against the applicant. The applicant
         cannot be said to be conspired with the main accused.
         The case of the prosecution itself is that the report was
         submitted subsequently after the loan was sanctioned.

(xv) The applicant is in custody for a period of about one year.
         Further detention of the applicant is not necessary.
         There is no evidence against the applicant as beneficiary
         of transactions.         He is not likely to abscond.             Charge-
         sheet is filed. Reliance is placed judgment of Supreme
         Court in the case of P. Chidambaram Vs. Directorate of
         Enforcement AIR (2020) SC 1699.

(xvi) Learned counsel relied upon the documents forming part
         of charge-sheet relating to the valuation reports and
         contended that the applicant is not signatory to the said
         documents. The statement of Kamal Banwait mentions
         that on allocation of any assignment valuation of
         property, the officials of M/s. Yardi Prabhu Consultants
         and Valuers Pvt. Ltd. (point of contact for PMC Bank) was
         Mr.Jeevan Yerulkar and after him Mr. Shripad Jere
         became the point of contact.           They would discus the
         valuation with concerned officials of PMC Bank before
         finalization and only if the valuations are in line with the
         loan proposal, the final valuation reports were submitted.



   ::: Uploaded on - 07/05/2021                  ::: Downloaded on - 10/09/2021 08:22:32 :::
 Ethape                                           11                                 BAst-4957-2020


            The witness has referred to transaction of M/s. Sapphire
            Land and Development Pvt. Ltd. which shows he has
            spoken to Jeevan Yerulkar from M/s.Yardi Prabhu
            Consultants for revision in the valuation of property and
            report dated 22.03.2018 depicting value of Rs.3 Crores
            which they received. It is submitted that the statement of
            said    witness          indicates        that    point      of     contact         was
            Mr.Jeevan Yerulkar who is witness in this case and
            Shripad Jere who is implicated as an accused in this
            case. The statement of witness does not substantiate the
            charge that the applicant has with co-accused.


5.          Learned APP Ms. Prajakta Shinde submitted as follows:-
     (i)           On      20.09.2019        application           was        submitted           by
            Sukhbir Singh Mehta, Manager, Recovery Cell of PMC
            Bank against Joy Thomas and other officials of PMC
            Bank      alongwith         Directors        of    Housing          Development
            Infrastructure Ltd. (for short "HDIL") and its group
            companies causing loss of Rs.4355 Crores to PMC Bank.
            FIR was registered with Bhandup Police Station and the
            investigation was transferred to Economic Offences Wing
            (for short "EOW").

     (ii)          Three charge-sheets are filed against the accused.
            The applicant (accused No.14) was the Director and
            owner of M/s.Yardi Prabhu Consultants and Valuers Pvt.



      ::: Uploaded on - 07/05/2021                             ::: Downloaded on - 10/09/2021 08:22:32 :::
 Ethape                                  12                           BAst-4957-2020


          Ltd. The applicant in connivance with Managing Director
          Joy Thomas of PMC Bank willfully raised the actual value
          of properties mortgaged by various borrowers.                          The
          borrowers procured desired credit facility from PMC
          Bank. The actual value of property was less compared to
          its market value. Such act of concealment/suppression
          of fact by applicant and furnishing false value of such
          mortgaged property caused contributory wrongful loss to
          PMC Bank as owner could not realize actual cost of
          mortgaged        properties   when   the    credit       account          of
          borrowers became Non Performing Assets (NPA).


  (iii)        The applicant in connivance with main accused Joy
          Thomas of PMC Bank created false valuation of property
          owned by PMC Bank.             This inability of accused Joy
          Thomas to patch the balance sheet of PMC Bank and to
          provide substantial capital adequacy ratio as desired by
          banking controlling authority i.e. RBI. Due to false
          valuation reports in respect of the properties of PMC
          Bank, accused Joy Thomas concealed bona-fide financial
          status of PMC Bank from RBI.

  (iv)         Reliance is placed on the statements of Smt.Manjeet
          Kaur Ishwar Singh, Jeevan Baliram Yerulkar, Rajesh
          Madhubhai Mehta, Sameer Abhay Paranjape and extract
          of financial audit by Grant Thortan.




   ::: Uploaded on - 07/05/2021                 ::: Downloaded on - 10/09/2021 08:22:32 :::
 Ethape                                    13                            BAst-4957-2020


  (v)          Learned APP relied upon contents of affidavit-in-
         reply filed by the Investigating Officer.


  (vi)         The valuations submitted by M/s.Yardi Prabhu were
         inadequate to form required reserve and arrive at the
         desired capital adequacy, Mr. Joy Thomas asked the
         applicant to increase the value of certain properties i.e.
         Carnac Bunder, Bhadup Dreams Mall and the premises
         which the bank had acquired through merger of banks
         like Kolhapur Janta Sahakari Bank, Chetna Sahakari
         Bank.      The       applicant    accordingly     preferred          revised
         valuation report with inflated value and submitted to
         PMC Bank.

  (vii)        During investigation it was revealed that there was
         nexus between Managing Director Joy Thomas and
         Vishwanath Prabhu (Applicant). It establishes the mala-
         fide intention of Joy Thomas who utilized false and
         exuberated valuation of PMC Bank's owned properties
         and suppressed bona-fide financial position of PMC Bank
         from the scanner of banking regulation authority i.e. RBI.
         During the course of investigation, one of the employees
         of PMC Bank and erstwhile secretary Joy Thomas i.e. Ms.
         Kamaljit Banwait was examined in respect of role of
         accused Vishwanath Prabhu and Shripad Jere, Ms.
         Kamal Banwait, Chief Manager and Secretary to Joy




   ::: Uploaded on - 07/05/2021                    ::: Downloaded on - 10/09/2021 08:22:32 :::
 Ethape                                      14                               BAst-4957-2020


         Thomas elaborated complicity of Vishwanath Prabhu and
         Shripad Jere in this case.

     (viii)       Learned APP relied upon the following decisions of
         the Supreme Court:-
        (a) YS Jagan Mohan Reddy Vs. CBI (2013) 7 SCC 439.
        (b) Serious Fraud Investigation Office Vs. Nitin Johari
           and Anr. (2019) 9 SCC page 165.

6.       Learned            counsel   for        intervenor        supported              the
     submissions of learned APP. It is submitted that the
     applicant has played vital role in causing loss to the bank.
     Several depositors were put to loss. The applicant is Director
     of M/s.Yardi Prabhu Consultants and Valuers Pvt. Ltd.
     There were notified valuers of PMC Bank. It was his duty to
     impartially valuate the properties and provide reports. The
     applicant provided false valuation reports of the property.


7.       PMC Bank is the multi-state Co-operative Bank. HDIL, a
     group of companies, was the largest borrower of PMC Bank.
     According to prosecution, officials of PMC Bank including
     Joy      Thomas,          Managing     Director,     Mr.      Wariyan          Singh,
     Directors and the main accused Sarang Wadhawan and
     Rakesh Wadhawan have played role in causing loss to the
     bank.




      ::: Uploaded on - 07/05/2021                      ::: Downloaded on - 10/09/2021 08:22:32 :::
 Ethape                                     15                             BAst-4957-2020


8.       The       applicant        is   Director   of    M/s.Yardi             Prabhu
     Consultants and Valuers Pvt. Ltd. It is the case of the
     prosecution that during the course of investigation, it was
     revealed that on 29.10.2016 and 01.11.2016 request was
     received       from        Chairman    of   HDIL      Mr.      Rakeshkumar
     Wadhawan through Managing Director Mr.Joy Thomas
     (Accused No.3) for remittance of Rs.10 Crores. Thereafter
     PMC Bank had remitted an amount of Rs.10 Crores on
     29.10.2016 and Rs. 5 Crores on 01.11.2016 to the account
     of M/s. Sapphire Land and Development Pvt. Ltd. Having
     their account in Kotak Mahindra Bank, this amount was
     remitted from advance account i.e. Sundry receivable
     account of the bank without taking any collateral security
     from M/s. HDIL and it remained overdue for a long period.
     As the Sundry account has to be reconciled and reported to
     RBI with reason for long pending advances, the amount was
     to be reversed. The said amount was pending for long time.
     The PMC Bank decided to purchase the premises of M/s.
     Sapphire Land and Development Pvt. Ltd. at Hanuman
     Nagar, Akurli Road, Kandivali (E). Mumbai to secure up the
     loan account of M/s. Sapphire Land and Development Pvt.
     Ltd. This decision was taken after discussion between Mr.
     Waryam Singh and Mr. Joy Thomas at Central Office,
     Bhandup in the month of February 2018. The property was
     in possession of PMC Bank on rented basis since the year
     1996-97.          Accordingly, sale agreement dated 31.03.2018



     ::: Uploaded on - 07/05/2021                    ::: Downloaded on - 10/09/2021 08:22:32 :::
 Ethape                            16                        BAst-4957-2020


  between PMC Bank and M/s. Sapphire Land Development
  Pvt. Ltd. was registered for sum of Rs.10,10,11,000/-. The
  sale agreement was fixed by Joy Thomas to settle the loan
  amount given to M/s. Sapphire Land Development Pvt. Ltd.
  The investigation revealed that as instructed by Joy Thomas,
  M/s. Yardi Prabhu Consultants and Valuers Pvt. Ltd. were
  deputed for valuation of the above property.           Accordingly,
  PMC Bank received valuation report from M/s. Yardi Prabhu
  Consultants and Valuers Pvt. Ltd. in which fair market
  valuation was Rs.3 Crores. As the valuation was less than
  the amount given to M/s.Sapphire Land Development Pvt.
  Ltd. The transaction of purchase of property was withheld.
  During the statutory audit for 2017-18 after verifying the
  'files of premises purchased' the partner of Lakdawala and
  Company pointed lower valuation of the premises purchased
  by the PMC bank from M/s.Sapphire Land Development Pvt.
  Ltd. The said company was owning the sum of Rs.10 Crores,
  however the valuation of property was Rs.3 Crores. Mr. Joy
  Thomas instructed to take fresh valuation of the property
  from M/s.Yardi Prabhu Consultants with the value of
  property as Rs.10,10,11,000/-. Mr. Shripad Jere from M/s.
  Yardi Prabhu Consultants and Valuers Pvt. Ltd. was
  contacted for revision in the valuation of property for
  justification of purchase cost in line with settlement of
  amount owed by M/s. Sapphire Land Development Pvt. Ltd.,
  for which sale agreement was registered on 31.03.2018. As



   ::: Uploaded on - 07/05/2021        ::: Downloaded on - 10/09/2021 08:22:32 :::
 Ethape                              17                           BAst-4957-2020


     requested by Mr. Shripad Jere, the applicant forwarded copy
     of the registered agreement dated 31.03.2018 to him and
     PMC Bank received Revised Desktop Valuation Report dated
     04.03.2019 from M/s.Yardi Prabhu Consultants and Valuers
     Pvt. Ltd., wherein fair market value was inflated from
     Rs.3.00 Crores to Rs.7.76 Crores.


9.       The investigation revealed that in July 2018 Mr. Tejander
     Singh Bal approached PMC Bank and requested for single
     mortgage loan of Rs.130 lakhs of his property at 6th floor, flat
     No.603 Bholenath Residency, Village Wadhavli, Chembur Tq.
     Kurla, Mumbai which was already mortgaged with PMC
     Bank. He applied for mortgage loan, instead of two loans i.e.
     cash credit limit and Housing loan so that the loan
     repayment would be easier and faster. On his request of
     Smt.Manjeet Kaur discussed the loan proposal with Mr. Joy
     Thomas and it was decided to grant him single mortgage
     loan of Rs.130 lakhs on his property already mortgaged with
     PMC Bank. As per bank policy, for granting loan of Rs.130
     lakhs, value of property was required to be mortgaged was
     Rs.163 lakhs.


10.      Tejinder Singh Bal had availed housing loan of Rs.41
     lakhs on which outstanding amount was Rs.30.29 lakhs on
     14.08.2018 and cash credit facility of Rs.70 lakhs on




     ::: Uploaded on - 07/05/2021           ::: Downloaded on - 10/09/2021 08:22:32 :::
 Ethape                                    18                               BAst-4957-2020


  28.09.2017 and outstanding amount was Rs.67.57 lakhs.
  Thus, the total loan was Rs.111.00 lakhs and outstanding
  amount was 97.86 lakhs. As per the banking norms, while
  granting loan amount maximum 80% of the property value
  can be considered under the power of Managing Director.
  Mr.Tejinder Singh Bal required additionally loan of Rs.32
  lakhs for which security of Rs.163 lakhs was required. Smt.
  Manjeet Kaur requested Mr. Jeevan Yerulkar of M/s.Yardi
  Prabhu Consultants and Valuers Pvt. Ltd. to provide the
  value of the properties and said request was made through
  e-mail dated 01.08.2018. Considering tentative value of
  property as Rs.162.60, the fresh mortgage loan proposal of
  Rs.130 lakhs was sanctioned to Mr.Tejinder Bal. Valuation
  report was not received on 14.08.2018 but the loan amount
  was sanctioned. E-mail was sent by official of PMC Bank on
  16.05.2019 to M/s.Yardi Prabhu Consultants calling for
  valuation report. The valuation report of property of Tejinder
  Singh        Bal      from      M/s.Yardi      Prabhu       Consultants              was
  forwarded to PMC Bank on 12.06.2019.                            The report was
  received on 12.06.2019 as per desired value of Rs.162.60
  lakhs        as      quoted       PMC        Bank   official        with        invoice
  No.822/2019-20 dated 12.06.2019 for Rs.2360.00.


11. According              to     the   prosecution      Vishwanath              Prabhu
  (applicant) and co-accused Shripad Jere have prepared and
  certified the adulterated valuation reports for PMC Bank as



   ::: Uploaded on - 07/05/2021                       ::: Downloaded on - 10/09/2021 08:22:32 :::
 Ethape                                     19                            BAst-4957-2020


  true and authentic. Both have not verified the bona-fide a
  value/cost of the properties of PMC Bank and other
  mortgaged properties of borrowers of bank by following due
  diligence.


12. During investigation it was revealed that the applicant
  was in contact with Mr. Joy Thomas for valuation of property
  of PMC Bank, Mr. Joy Thomas asked him to get revaluation
  of properties owned by PMC Bank. When the draft valuation
  reports were submitted to Mr.Joy Thomas, he called the
  applicant for discussion to finalize the valuation reports.
  The applicant went to Central office of PMC Bank at
  Bhandup for discussion on the valuation with Mr.Joy
  Thomas. The valuations submitted were inadequate to form
  the required reserve and arrive at the desired capital
  adequacy, Mr.Joy Thomas asked the applicant to increase
  the value of certain properties i.e. Carnac Bunder, Bhandup
  DREAMS MALL and the premises which the bank had
  acquired through merger of banks like Kolhapur Janta
  Sahakari Bank Ltd., Chetna Shakara Bank. M/s.Yardi
  Prabhu Consultants and Valuers Pvt. Ltd. are at the panel of
  PMC Bank since 2004-05. Major assignments pertaining to
  big     borrowers               were   awarded   to    M/s.Yardi             Prabhu
  Consultants was assigned with the Fixed Assets Audit of the
  bank. Out of all the above valuers, 60% of the valuation job
  was allotted to M/s.Yardi Prabhu Consultants and according



   ::: Uploaded on - 07/05/2021                     ::: Downloaded on - 10/09/2021 08:22:32 :::
 Ethape                                    20                              BAst-4957-2020


  to prosecution in return, they were provided valuation report
  with adjustable and desirable amount of property in
  question. During investigation, it was revealed that the
  accused were deputed at the behest of masterminds of the
  fraud       i.e.     Mr.Joy      Thomas      and    M/s.Warayam                Singh,
  Chairman of PMC Bank.


13. The case of the prosecution is that the applicant is one of
  the main Director of M/s.Yardi Prabhu Consultants and
  Valuers Pvt. Ltd. He was instrumental in conducting
  valuation of various properties of borrowers and mostly HDIL
  and their associate companies who availed overdraft facilities
  from PMC Bank by furnishing less valued properties. The
  applicant          has      directly   contributed      in     furthering           and
  facilitating the conspiracy hatched by accused.                                 If the
  accused were not involved in the mala-fide act of overvaluing
  less valued properties of borrower, other accused would not
  have sanctioned and disbursed the loan to the borrowers
  causing loss to the bank.                    The actual value of several
  mortgaged properties with PMC Bank is too less and the
  bank is not any in a position to liquidate such less valued
  properties.


14. The applicant has tried to shift the onus of his acts on his
  employee Jeevan Yerulkar who was working with M/s.Yardi




   ::: Uploaded on - 07/05/2021                      ::: Downloaded on - 10/09/2021 08:22:32 :::
 Ethape                                   21                             BAst-4957-2020


  Prabhu Consultants and Valuers Pvt. Ltd. The statement of
  Jeevan Yerulkar has been recorded. He has stated that he
  was working with M/s.Yardi Prabhu Consultants and
  Valuers Pvt. Ltd. from 2007 to February 2019. Thereafter he
  resigned.         During        his   tenure   with    M/s.Yardi            Prabhu
  Consultants, he was contact point for the valuers. PMC is
  major client of M/s.Yardi Prabhu Consultants and Valuers.
  All the proposal from PMC Bank for valuations were issued
  to Yardi Prabhu Consultants and Valuers Pvt. Ltd. through
  him. After submissions of 'valuation report' if any correction
  or changes were required. He used to get call from Smt.
  Banwait and he would convey the message to applicant.
  Applicant was authorized to make alteration in report and
  make it final.            Statement of Kamal Banwait was recorded
  under Section 161 and 164 of Cr.P.C. She has established
  the role of the applicant.

15. During the course of investigation, it was revealed that
  the appointment letter to Shripad Jere was issued under the
  signature of applicant. Letter establishes understanding
  between both the accused for the purpose of preparing
  valuation of properties and signing the valuation reports. It
  is alleged that the report signed by co-accused Shripad Jere
  are consented and agreed upon by the applicant. The reports
  prepared by the applicant with the assistance of the co-
  accused does not require mandatorily to be signed or



   ::: Uploaded on - 07/05/2021                    ::: Downloaded on - 10/09/2021 08:22:32 :::
 Ethape                                    22                             BAst-4957-2020


  certified by applicant. There existed consensual agreement
  between PMC Bank and the applicant whereby allegedly on
  demand, he used to send valuation report to PMC Bank.


16. Statements of several witnesses were recorded. It was
  revealed          that          M/s.Yardi    Prabhu     Consultants              were
  functioning as major valuers of PMC Bank. Mr. Joy Thomas
  availed services of M/s.Yardi Prabhu Consultants for several
  years. It was revealed that services of valuation of the firm
  were utilized in obtaining desired valuation reports of
  properties provided by borrowers and mainly HDIL to avail
  credit/loan facilities from PMC Bank. The applicant was in
  proximity with Joy Thomas.

17. Statement of Rajesh Madhubhai Mehta, an independent
  valuer, was recorded. He has stated that there were
  irregularities in the valuation report of M/s.Yardi Prabhu
  Consultants.            The valuation given by them is inflated and
  exaggerated and not as per Annual Statement Rates
  published by the Government. Mr. Mehta has given findings
  about irregularities in respect to the valuation reports.

18. During the course of investigation statement of Ms.
  Jyotsna Srivastav was recorded and she was shown e-mail
  sent by her on 16.05.2019 to M/s.Yardi Prabhu Consultants
  calling for the valuation report of one customer of PMC Bank




   ::: Uploaded on - 07/05/2021                     ::: Downloaded on - 10/09/2021 08:22:32 :::
 Ethape                               23                            BAst-4957-2020


  Mr. Tejinder Sing Bal. The e-mail indicates that the request
  was made to provide the valuation report July/August 2018
  with the value approximately at Rs.162.20 lakhs. The earlier
  valuation report is enclosed for perusal.                     Smt.Jyotsna
  Srivastav sent email to Yardi Prabhu Valuers on instructions
  of Smt. Manjeet Kaur to process the proposal for sanction of
  loan to Mr.Tejinder Singh Bal considering the value of
  property at Rs.162.20 Crores approximately. In June 2018,
  Mr.Tejinder Singh met Smt.Manjeet Kaur Ishwar Singh and
  requested for single mortgage loan of Rs.1.30 Crores instead
  of two loans.            Statement of Kamal Banwait mentions that
  PMC Bank had 20 valuers for valuation of properties.

19. Ms.Kamal Banwait in her statement dated 17.02.2020
  has stated that M/s. Yardi Prabhu Consultants were
  handling 60% of the valuation of the PMC Bank.                           Major
  assignments pertaining to big borrowers were awarded to
  M/s. Yardi Prabhu Consultants and Valuers Pvt. Ltd. Since
  2008 as per instructions of Joy Thomas and Ms. Manjeet
  Kaur all the valuations for purchase of properties were done
  by M/s.Yardi Prabhu Consultants and Valuers Pvt. Ltd. All
  the valuations for properties mortgaged by M/s. HDIL was
  done by M/s. Yardi Prabhu Consultants and Valuers Pvt.
  Ltd.       She also stated that the bank had carried out
  revaluation of its owned premises in 2012 & 15 for patching
  up the balance sheet of the bank which was again done by



   ::: Uploaded on - 07/05/2021               ::: Downloaded on - 10/09/2021 08:22:32 :::
 Ethape                                  24                               BAst-4957-2020


  M/s.Yardi Prabhu Consultants and Valuers Pvt. Ltd. To give
  a desired valuation of properties for arriving at profit goal by
  PMC Bank Mr. Joy Thomas had a meeting in his cabin in
  PMC Bank in the month of April 2012 with applicant and he
  was asked to value the premises of DREAMS MALL at
  enhanced rate although, the Mall was not operational. M/s.
  Yardi Prabhu Consultants are on the panel PMC Bank since
  2004-05.          There were many other valuers on the panel of
  PMC Bank, however, major assignments pertaining to big
  borrowers were awarded to M/s.Yardi Prabhu Consultants
  and Valuers Pvt. Ltd. Smt. Manjeet Kaur in her statement
  dated 12.02.2020 has stated that Joy Thomas had told her
  to convey M/s. Yardi Prabhu Valuers to prepare valuation
  report of properties of Tejinder Sing Bal, 17% more than its
  actual value. She called Mr. Jeevan Yerulkar and asked him
  to submit valuation of property.                  She also told Jyotsna
  Srivastav to forward the mail to that effect to M/s. Yardi
  Prabhu Valuers. On instructions from Joy Thomas loan was
  disbursed to Tejinder Singh Bal before receipt of valuation
  report. Subsequently, Joy Thomas requested to send e-mail
  and call for the back dated report of June 2018 for
  Rs.163.00 lakhs was received. Her subsequent statement
  dated 20.02.2020 shows that the applicant was in contact
  with Mr.Joy Thomas for valuation of property of PMC Bank
  and she was asked by Mr.Joy Thomas to get revaluation of
  properties         owned        by   PMC   Bank      from       Yardi        Prabhu



   ::: Uploaded on - 07/05/2021                     ::: Downloaded on - 10/09/2021 08:22:32 :::
 Ethape                                  25                                BAst-4957-2020


  Consultants.            When    the   draft   valuation            reports        were
  submitted, Mr. Thomas asked her to call the applicant for
  discussion to finalize the valuation report. Accordingly, she
  contacted the applicant and called him to central office at
  Bhandup for discussion on the valuation with Mr.Joy
  Thomas. As the valuations submitted were inadequate to
  form required reserve and arrive at the desired capital
  adequacy, Mr. Thomas asked the applicant to increase the
  value of certain properties i.e. Carnac Bunder, Bhandup
  Dreams Mall and premises which had acquired through
  merger of banks like Kolhapur Janta Sahakari Bank,
  Chetana Shakara Bank. Statement of Smt.Jyotsna Srivastav
  was recorded on 15.02.2020 shows that the Manjeetsing
  Kaur had requested to Mr.Jeevan Yerulkar to provide the
  latest value of properties.                She proceeded with fresh
  mortgage loan on instructions from Manjeet Kaur. The
  contention of the applicant is however that neither Shripad
  Jere nor Jeevan Yerulkar were responsible for the alleged
  acts. The contention deserves to be rejected. The applicant
  has been assigned actual role in submitting the tainted
  reports as stated above. The statement of Rajesh Mehta was
  recorded on 03.06.2020. He has stated that he was shown
  valuation           reports     prepared      by       M/s.Yardi              Prabhu
  Consultants and Valuers Pvt. Ltd. He has pointed out
  irregularities and has stated that the valuation report does
  not reflect ready reckoner rates published by Government,



   ::: Uploaded on - 07/05/2021                      ::: Downloaded on - 10/09/2021 08:22:32 :::
 Ethape                                     26                             BAst-4957-2020


  depreciation           for      the   period   since    construction,             sales
  instances in the close vicinity and area clarification for
  conversation of carpet area into builtup area. Several other
  anomalies were referred by him in his statement.


20. The evidence on record clearly indicates that the
  applicant was acting in connivance with Joy Thomas, the
  then Managing Director of PMC Bank and the prime accused
  in this case. The nexus between Mr. Joy Thomas and the
  applicant is revealed. It establishes mala fide intention of Joy
  Thomas who utilized value of PMC Bank properties from the
  scanner authority i.e. RBI, merely on the ground that the
  Jeevan Yerulkar or Mr. Shripad Jere was contacted by the
  applicant, cannot be absolved from his liabilities. Thus,
  there is voluminous evidence showing involvement of the
  applicant in the offences. The judgment relied by applicant is
  not applicable to the facts of this case.

21. Considering the aforesaid circumstances and the nature
  of evidence collected during the investigation as reflected in
  the charge-sheet, statements which contained the statement
  of witnesses connivance of applicant is writ large. Hence no
  case for grant of bail is made out.

                                        ORDER

(i) Bail Application (St.) No.4957 of 2020 is rejected.

(ii) In the event the trial is not concluded within a ::: Uploaded on - 07/05/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 10/09/2021 08:22:32 ::: Ethape 27 BAst-4957-2020 period of one year, the applicant will be at liberty to file fresh application for bail.

(iii) Application stands disposed of.

(PRAKASH D. NAIK J.) ::: Uploaded on - 07/05/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 10/09/2021 08:22:32 :::