9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (8) TMI 1324X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CBI is on it's way to file third charge-sheet. It is submitted that since till date, the investigation itself is incomplete with 92 witnesses being cited to be examined during the trial, the conclusion of the trial in the nearest future appear to be a remote possibility. The learned counsel has placed reliance upon the recent verdict of the Supreme Court in case of Satender Kumar Antil vs. CBI, (Special Leave to Appeal CRL No.5191/2021 dated 11/7/2022) and would submit that the Hon'ble Apex Court has, in the said decision, exhaustively considered the scope and ambit of Section 170 of Cr.P.C and the learned counsel would submit that as far as the present applicant is concerned, he came from abroad and submitted himself to the jurisdiction of the Court and in an offence under PMLA, he has been released on bail by the Special Judge on 7/9/2018, by recording that although it is claimed by the Enforcement Directorate that further investigation is in progress, it appears that the applicant had joined the investigation and his statement was recorded, and he was not arrested during the investigation, but he had appeared before the Court in pursuance of the summons issued to him. The lea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ubmit that the applicant is attributed a serious role in the charge-sheet and since he was working as a Vice President (Banking Operations) at M/s.Geetanjali Gems Limited, his application do not deserve any consideration. Mr.Venegaonkar would invite my attention to the seriousness of the accusations faced by the applicant by submitting that on the basis of the original charge-sheet as well as the supplementary charge-sheet, the total amount involved, is around Rs.7080.86 crores for the period ranging between 2013- 2017. Mr.Venegaonkar would submit that the offence is serious, where the bank official Shri Gokulnath Shetty, Deputy Manager of Punjab National Bank in connivance with the accused Directors of Gitanjali Group of Companies, defrauded PNB of the huge amount in the matter of issuance of unauthorized and fraudulent letters of Undertaking (LoUs) from 1/3/2017 to 2/5/2017 in favour of Overseas branches of various Indian Banks and purported letter of Credits (FLC) in favour of foreign suppliers of the accused companies. 6 Focusing on the enormity of the fraud, it is submitted that the applicant was functioning as a Vice President for Gitanjali Group of Companies, and he was on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CS increased by another Rs.1251.56 Crores. Thereafter, on 04.03.2018 Punjab National Bank filed another supplementary complaint for defrauding Punjab National Bank in the sanctioned limit of M/s. Gitanjali Gems Ltd., M/s. Gili India Ltd., M/s. Nakshatra Brands Ltd. and M/s. Asmi Jewellery India Ltd. for an additional amount of Rs. 942.18 Crores. The total amount therefore allegedly defrauded by the accused persons till date is about Rs. 7080.86 Crores during the period 2013-2017. C) The allegation in brief is, the accused Bank official, Shri Gokulnath Shetty in connivance with the accused Directors of Gitanjali Group of Companies and unknown persons defrauded PNB to the extent of Rs. 7080.86 Crores in the matter of issuance of unauthorized and fraudulent Letters of Undertaking (LOUS-143 Nos) between the period 01.03.2017 to 02.05.2017 in favour of overseas Branches of various Indian banks and purported Foreign Letters of Credit (FLC), in favour of foreign suppliers of the accused companies. D) It is alleged that Shri Gokulnath Shetty, Deputy Manager (Retd), Punjab National Bank posted in Forex Department at Mid Corporate Branch, Brady House, Mumbai, fraudulently issued 143 LOUs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ning as Vice President (Banking Operation and Finance) for Gitanjali Group of Companies. He was also one of the authorized signatories to the account of all the accused companies M/s.Gitanjali Gems Ltd, M/s.Gili India Ltd, and M/s.Nakshatra Brands Ltd maintained with PNB Bank, Brady House, Mumbai. He is charged with hatching a conspiracy with Mehul Choksi and of submitting applications along with import documents with PNB Bank, Brady House, Mumbai, for issuance of 165 LOUs and for submitting applications for fraudulent enhancement of value of 58 FLCs issued during the period commencing from 23/1/2017 to 15/5/2017, which are jointly signed by the applicant and Aniyath Shivraman Nair (Accused no.7). The investigation also reveal that the present applicant, in connivance with the co-accused Mehul Choksi, had dishonestly and fraudulently shown corresponding liability towards the purported suppliers i.e. M/s.4C's Diamonds Distributors and M/s.Shanayo Gong SI Ltd, Hongkong in the books of the companies and not towards the PNB who had issued the LOUs. 8 The charge-sheet filed against the applicant reveal his role along with the mastermind of the case Mehul Choksi (accused no.6) and it is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sons is scanned for, both face an identical accusation. They are alleged of submitting an application for opening of an FLC for US$ of 1,000,000 with the beneficiary as M/s. Crown Aim Limited, Hong Kong and the advising bank with UCO Bank, Hong Kong for purported import of fresh water pearls and the date of shipment being 23/3/2017. An identical role attributed to both the applicants by transmitting a SWIFT message favouring UCO Bank with the beneficiary name for usage period of 180 days. 13 When Mr.Venegaonkar is asked to point out the material in the charge-sheet, which attribute a role distinct to the applicant than co-accused Aniyath Nair (accused no.7), the learned counsel is unable to assign a distinct role to the present applicant. The charge-sheet against the Managing Director Mehul Choksi and his accomplice i.e. Accused no.9, Joint President (Finance) who is in-charge of the Banking Operations, along with the present applicant working as Vice President (Banking Operation) Nitin Shahi (Accused no.8 - Assistant Finance Manager) of the accused companies, accused nos.3, accused no.4 and accused no.5, accuse them of dishonestly and fraudulently showing the liability in the boo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of India vs. Najeeb, 2021 (3) SCC 713, has once again reiterated that, Liberty guaranteed by Part-III of the Constitution, shall bring within its protective ambit not only due procedure and fairness but also access to justice and speedy trial. The following observations by their Lordships of the Apex Court deserve a reproduction : "Liberty guaranteed by Part III of the Constitution would cover within its protective ambit not only due procedure and fairness but also access to justice and a speedy trial. Undertrials cannot indefinitely be detained pending trial. Ideally, no person ought to suffer adverse consequences of his acts unless the same is established before a neutral arbiter. However, owing to the practicalities of real life where to secure an effective trial and to ameliorate the risk to society in case a potential criminal is left at large pending trial, Courts are tasked with deciding whether an individual ought to be released pending trial or not. Once it is obvious that a timely trial would not be possible and the accused has suffered incarceration for a significant period of time, Courts would ordinarily be obligated to enlarge them on bail. It is true that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the witnesses are likely to be influenced by the applicant on being enlarged on bail during trial, and whether he is likely to flee from justice, if released on bail, will have to be weighed as against the right of an accused to be presumed to be innocent, till the charge is proved against him by the prosecution. Incarceration of the accused cannot be treated as synonymous with a punishment and assuming that the accused is prima facie guilty for a grave offence, bail cannot be refused in an indirect process of punishing the accused, before he is convicted of the charge framed against him. 19 The charge-sheet being filed against the present applicant on completion of investigation and the entire material crystallized therein, it would be suffice to secure the presence of the applicant at the time of his trial and he need not remain incarcerated by way of a punishment, till he face the trial for the charges levelled against him, however, serious may be the accusations faced by him. I may gainfully refer to the observation of the The Apex Court in case of Sanjay Chandra Vs. CBI, 2012(1) SCC 40, in relation to 2G Spectrum case, which read as under :- "Apart from the question ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
