Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

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 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.

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 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 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 be released on bail.