K CHANDRA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) . The law of bails, "has to dovetail two conflicting demands, namely on one hand, the requirements of the society for being sheilded from the hazards <PG>540</PG> being exposed to the misadventures of a person alleged to have committed a crime, and on the other, the fundamental canon of criminal jurisprudence, namely the presumption of innocence of an accused till he is found guilty." In order to subserve this object, the legislature has given direction/guidelines for granting or refusing bail in addition the courts have evolved certain norms for the proper exercise of such discretion. It is not a static law, it is growing. Its sources are the winds of circumstances and consiousness of man.

(2.) . The First Information Report bearing No.RC2(A)/92-ACU(V) dated 25th July, 1992 was lodged against Mr. V.Krishnamurthy, Ex-Member, Planning Commission, Harshad S. Mehta, a broker of Bombay, M/s. K.J. Investment Private Ltd. and others unknown. According to the prosecution, the Preliminary Enquiry conducted into the allegation revealed that Mr.V. Krishnamurthy as Member Planning Commission was Incharge of key economic sectors including industry, energy, public enterprises, labour, employment and manpower. He was also Chairman of the Committee on dis-investment in public enterprises. Mr. Harshad S. Mehta, a broker of the Bombay Stock Exchange and Chairman of Grownmore Research and Assets & Management Ltd. (hereinafter called as the "GRAM"). The business affairs of this company has an office in New Delhi managed by Mr. Mohan Dass Khandelwal, a broker of Delhi Stock Exchange. M/s. KJ. Investment is a Company registered in Madras on 26th December, 1990. Shri K-Jayaker and Shri K.Chandra both @mL3 sons of Shri V. Krishnamurthy had financial interests in M/s. K. J. Investments Private Ltd. which were being promoted by Shri V. Krishnamurthy. Mr. V. Krishnamurthy and Mr. Harshad S. Mehta had meetings and conversations at Delhi and Bombay and during these meetings they discussed Government policies and Shri V. Krishnamurthy showed his willingness to promote the business interests of Shri Harshad S. Mehta. He then negotiated with Harshad S. Mehta for payment of an amount of Rs.32 lakhs. Subsequently, Mohan D. Khandelwal on behalf of Harshad S. Mehta contacted Mr. V. Krishnamurthy who instructed him to draw a cheque in favour of M/s. K.J. Investments Private Ltd. for an amount that shall be specified by his son Shri K. Chandra. Following a telephonic conversation between the two, Shri Mohan D. Khandelwal sent a cheque of Rs32,74,000.00 to Mr. K. Chandra for and on behalf of Mr. Harshad S. Mehta in favour of M/s. KJ. Investments Private Ltd. This cheque was accepted and paid in the account of M/s, KJ. Investments Private Ltd. at the behest of Shri V. Krishnamurthy without any stipulation or condition for its return. Mr. V.Krishnamurthy was promoting the interests of M/s.KJ. Investments even before becoming a member of the Planning Commission. He approached the Sanwa Bank, New Delhi for sanctioning a loan of Rs.70 lakhs to M/s. KJ. Investments Private Ltd. Mr. V. Krishnamurthy was the guarantor for this loan which Was sanctioned for an amount of Rs.70 lakhs on 29th December, 1990 due for repayment on 14th January, 1992. Without re- payment of this loan, a second loan of Rs.20 lakhs was sanctioned to M/s. KJ. Investments Private Ltd. on 6th November, 1991. This loan was secured by the personal guarantee of Mr. V. Krishnamurthy when he was a public servant. Mr. V. Krishnamurthy's connections with foreign concerns helped M/s. KJ. Investments Private Ltd. in not only securing a loan but also favourably re-scheduling the repayments. It is in the background of these facts and circumstances that an offence against Mr. V. Krishnamurthy, Mr. Harshad S.Mehta, M/s. KJ. Investments Private Ltd. and other unknown was registered under Sections 11,12,13(2) read with Section 13(1) <PG>541</PG> (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter called as "P.C. Act") and under Section 120-BI.P.C. A regular case against the above said persons was registered by Shri U.S. Dutt, S.P. C.B.I., New Delhi and the investigation of the case was also taken up by him.

(3.) . It is further the case of the prosecution that the firms namely M/s. India Metres Ltd., M/s. K.J. Investments Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Ergodyne Private Ltd. are family concerns of Mr. V. Krishnamurthy. His second son Mr. K. Jaykor is the Director of M/s. KJ. Investments P/t. Ltd. Said son is an American citizen presently residing in U.S.A. It is in fact the petitioner who is looking after the business interest of M/s. K.J. Investments Private Ltd. Petitioner is the Director of M/s. Ergodyne (P) Ltd. It is further the case of the prosecution that the petitioner abeted the crime by conspiring with his father to take illegal justification from Mr.Harshad S. Mehta. This can be inferred from the fact that it was the petitioner who informed Mr. Khandelwal the exact amount to be paid and that the said amount on behalf of M/S.KJ. Investments Private Ltd. was received by the petitioner. The said amount was invested by the accused in the firm M/s. India Metre Ltd. which was lying sick. Therefore, he is guilty of abatement as well as of criminal conspiracy along with the others named in the F.I.R.