VIKATI NARAYAN REDDY Vs. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) . This petition is filed by accused No.2 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking his release in Crime DPDSB.2017/RC(E)/2017/CBI/BSFC/BLR.154 for the offences punishable under Section 120B r/w. Section 420 of IPC and Sections 13 (2) r/w. Section 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

(2.) I have heard the learned Senior counsel Sri B.V.Acharya and the learned counsel Sri Pradeep K.Gaunkar for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel Sri P.Prasanna Kumar for respondent-CBI.

(3.) Before going to consider the submissions made by the learned counsel, I feel it just and proper to briefly state the case of the prosecution to understand the factual situation. One Smt.Pooja Tiku, Deputy General Manager, IFCI Limited, filed a complaint on 3.5.2017 against accused Nos.1 to 8 contending that their Company is a financial institution and a Government of India Company registered under the Companies Act , 1956. One Sri V.C.Ramamohan was the Manager, petitioner-accused No.2 and accused No.3 were the Directors and Chief Officers of the said Company and were incharge of the affairs of the said Company. Accused Nos.4 and 5 are Technical Consultants providing technical management development to the Government Industries and Societies. Accused Nos.6 to 8 are the land owning Companies who have mortgaged the loan belonging to them as a security for loans availed by accused No.3 and they have also furnished corporate guarantee for the respective facilities availed by them. It is the further case of the prosecution that the complainant-Company for granting financial assistance for the prospective borrowers, used to secure the security by way of charge creating on immovable property including non-agricultural converted lands, distress sale values, has to be valued at 2.5 times of the loan sought depending upon the loan. In that light, during 2014, petitioner-accused No.2 being the Managing Director of the Company approached the complainant- Company with a request to sanction term loan of Rs.90 Crores for a period of six years repayable in 20 quarterly instalments from the 15th month of date of disbursement for executing there on-going projects. In the meanwhile to meet their urgent fund, petitioner-accused No.2 by virtue of e-mail, dated 18.8.2014 represented the complainant that they would provide security of 2007 to the loan amount and on the basis of the said representation the complainant-Company sanctioned an amount of Rs.205.02 Crores and the same was disbursed.