RITESH GUPTA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present anticipatory bail application under Sec. 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, has been preferred by the applicant in a case arising out of FIR No.1794/14 lodged on 30th Sept., 2008 under Sections 420/467/468/471/120B of the Indian Penal Code at Police Station Mangolpuri.

(2.) The facts as emerge from the records, are that the complainant Saroj Jindal lodged an FIR against the applicant Ritesh Gupta, his parents Mr.Ram Niwas & Ms.Renu Gupta, Mr.Anand Singh Rawat, stating therein that the applicant along with his parents Mr.Ram Niwas and Ms.Renu Gupta floated a company in the name of M/s Sidha Neelkanth Paper Industries Private Limited and obtained a loan from Andhara Bank, Pitampura Branch, New Delhi and mortgaged the property bearing no.170, Deepali, Pitam Pura, New Delhi. The complainant stated that with the consent of her husband and under the trust of her brother-in-law namely Mr.Ram Niwas Gupta, she created a mortgage over the property bearing no.392, Deepali, Pitam Pura, New Delhi and that Sh.Ram Niwas Gupta, being the promoter Director and the shareholder of the company, obtained a fresh loan from Andhra Bank to the tune of Rs.15.50 crores which was sanctioned on 27th March, 2010. On the said date itself, the complainant executed the required documents for availing the loan facility and alleged that she was unaware of any enhancement of the loan amount. Upon being served notice under SARFAESI Act by the Andhra Bank, the complainant received the information regarding recalling of the loan facility. It was further alleged by the complainant in the FIR that on the same date of recalling of the loan, the amount due had been sufficient to clear the dues of the bank for the sale of property bearing no.170, Deepali, Pitampura. Thereafter, for the purpose of recovery of dues, the bank had filed an Original Application No.116/2008 copy whereof was supplied to the complainant Saroj Jidnal on 12th Sept., 2008. The complainant has alleged that the bank has claimed the amount on the basis of enhancement of loan facility from 27th March, 2010 by granting an ad-hoc facility of Rs.3.00 crores on 20th Aug., 2010 as well as further executing documents with respect to letter of sanction dated 24th Jan., 2011 for an amount of Rs.20.00 cores sanctioned by Chief Manager of the Andhara Bank. The complainant has stated that the signatures on the guarantee form from pages 132 to 135 of the original application filed by the Bank, are forged and fabricated and that the complainant Saroj Jindal never executed any such documents. It was alleged that the accused persons including the applicant herein, have caused wrongful loss to the complainant and wrongful gain to themselves. The complainant in the FIR further alleged that the hand writing expert had submitted a report to the effect that the signatures on the documents dated 20th Aug., 2010 and 24th Jan., 2011 are not same.

(3.) Arguments advanced by learned senior counsel the applicant is that on 27th March, 2010, sanction was granted by the Andhra Bank to M/s Sidha Neelkanth Paper Pvt. Ltd. and that the property bearing no.170, Deepali, Pitampura, owned by his father Shri Ram Niwas Gupta and the property bearing No.392, Deepali, Pitampura, owned by Smt.Saroj Jindal, were mortgaged with the bank and that he was only a guarantor in the documents which was executed in pursuance of the said sanction. It was further submitted that the company secured additional ad-hoc facility of Rs.00 crores and that the said amount was returned by the company and it was only thereafter that the sanction advice dated 27th March, 2010 was reinstated. It was further submitted that on 24th Jan., 2011, the company further requested the bank to increase the sanction limit from Rs.15.50 crores to Rs.20.00 crores, however, the sanction advice had not been issued by the bank. It was further submitted that the complainant Saroj Jindal illegally flouted the sanction advice dated 27th March, 2010 and sold the entire property to Mr.Pramod Kumar Aggarwal, for a consideration of Rs.17.71 crores and accepted Rs.5.50 crores as advance. It was next contended that on 24th Oct., 2012, the complainant Saroj Jindal and Mr.Pramod Kumar Aggarwal entered into a subsequent supplementary agreement to sell acknowledging the mortgage of property being 392, Deepali, Pitampura and on 27th April, 2013, the account of the company was declared by the Bank as Non- Performing Asset on the balance amount of Rs.16.61 crores as a result of which the existing limit for a sum of Rs.15.50 crores issued by the Bank, as availed by the company, existed.