VINAY MEHRA Vs. STATE THR. CBI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is invoking the jurisdiction of this Court by filing this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying for quashing of R.C No.1(A)/92 -ACU.II, under Sections 5(1) (d) & 5(2) P.C. Act read with Sections 420/120 -B/468/471 IPC as well as the chargesheet and the criminal proceedings emanating therefrom in view of the compromise entered into between petitioner and respondent No.2 ­ Bank of India in civil litigation.

(2.) IN brief, as per FIR and charge sheet, the accusations against the petitioner and his co -accused are that they entered into criminal conspiracy to cheat respondent No.2 -Bank of India for the reason that M/s. Kanishka Tyres and Tubes, of which this petitioner was the Managing Director, had secured financial assistance from another Bank by mortgaging its assets like factory premises, machinery etc. and was not in a position to secure further credit and other facilities from that Bank and other Banks. In the year 1984, Kanishka Tyres & Tubes was passing through financial crisis and the Chief Manager of respondent No.2 -Bank was approached for financial assistance. A new company in the name and style of M/s. Harrison Tyres was incorporated and application for financial assistance was submitted. Current account was opened in the name of M/s. Harrison Tyres with the respondent No.2 - Bank on 30.10.1984 and a loan to the said company was sanctioned on the same day. It is further alleged against the petitioner that he opened another account in the name of another company named M/s. Harrison Tyres with Bank of Maharashtra, Sonepat in which the cheques and drafts received from various parties were deposited, which were required to be deposited with Bank of India so that the Bank could adjust that amount against the loan taken by the petitioner. Thus, in this manner, the amount deposited in Bank of Maharashtra was credited and utilized for the benefit of the petitioner and co -accused Sanjeev Sood and Wg. Commander Verma.

(3.) AFTER filing of the chargesheet, charges were framed against all the accused persons including the present petitioner. The order on charge was impugned by filing Crl.Rev.P. No.1093/2002 which was dismissed on 09.03.2007. During trial, out of 105 witnesses, 24 witnesses have been examined by the prosecution.