BODO HERBERT GARBE Vs. CBI & ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CRL.M.C. 5286/2013

(2.) Vide order dated 27.07.2013, the ld. Trial Court recorded that as per the charge-sheet, there had been meetings of the petitioner with accused Abhishek Verma and Gerhard Hoy and he had participated in various meetings and also visited India on several occasions. The petitioner was the CEO of M/s. Rheinmetall Air Defence, which was being blacklisted and was in full knowledge of what was going on. Accordingly, the ld. Trial Court opined that there are sufficient grounds to proceed against the petitioner and issued summons against him.

(3.) Ld. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the name of the petitioner was neither mentioned in the FIR nor in the charge-sheet filed by the CBI and was not even in column no. 12 of the charge-sheet. In such a situation, after going through the charge-sheet, if the Trial Court smelt that the investigating agency has not investigated the case properly, then the Court was duty bound to direct the CBI to investigate the matter further and if any material is found against the petitioner, they may file the charge-sheet. He lastly submits that taking cognisance and summoning the petitioner vide the impugned order dated 27.07.2013 is bad in law as no case is made out against the petitioner.