USHA ANAND Vs. C B I

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this petition filed by the petitioner, the petitioner is seeking release of amount which was deposited by her husband with respondent No. 2 i.e. Engineering Export Promotion Council (EEPC). The husband of the petitioner late Yash Pal Anand was a merchant exporter of automotive components and was carrying on business in the name and style of M/s. Anand Auto Craft Centre. In the year 1994 CBI registered six cases against him under Sections 420,468/471 read with Section 120B of IPC. Identical cases of equal numbers were also registered against his three brothers, namely, S/Shri Ashok Anand, Satish Anand and Subhash Anand. It is not in dispute that in all these cases filed against four brothers allegations were identical. When the investigation was on, the petitioner deposited a sum of Rs. 22 lacs with the respondent No. 2. Since there is some dispute as to in what circumstances this amount was deposited by late Yash Pal Anand with the respondent No. 2 I shall advert to this aspect in the later part of this order. In similar fashion, amounts were deposited by his three brothers as well with the respondent No. 2. The trial proceeded against all four brothers. However, Yash Pal Anand died before the conclusion of the trial and, therefore, proceedings against him abated. Insofar as his three brothers are concerned trial resulted in their acquittal and judgment dated 22/6/2001 was rendered by trial Court in this behalf. CBI filed appeals against those acquittals which were also dismissed by this Court on 27/5/2002. No further appeals were filed and, therefore, the said judgment attained finality.

(2.) After the acquittal of three brothers of deceased Yash Pal Anand they claimed the refund of the amount by moving requisite applications before the learned Trial Court. Learned Trial Court passed order dated 13.8.2001 directing the refund of the amount. A copy of this order is annexed with this petition as Annexure P-2. The operative portion of the order reads as under:

(3.) In spite of aforesaid orders when the amount was not paid the said brothers of late Yash Pal Anand preferred a petition under Section 482 in this Court which was allowed vide order dated 5.10.2001. It may be noted that even after notice to the respondent No. 2 in those proceedings no body had appeared on behalf of the respondent No. 2. However, on the orders passed by this Court directing refund of the amount, amount was thereafter refunded and the said orders were complied with.