RAJENDRAKUMAR DHANRAJ BANTHIA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Learned advocates for the respective respondents waive service.

(2.) The revisionist is challenging the order dtd. 18/1/2018 passed below Exh. 66 in Criminal Case No. 3047 of 2009 where the learned Court was pleased to reject the discharge application.

(3.) The case of the prosecution on 5/1/2002 by filing of FIR being I-C.R. No. 6 of 2002, registered with Anand Town Police Station, on a complaint filed by Mr. Suresh Dalwadi, General Manager of Charotar Nagrik Sahakari Bank Ltd. (CNSB) for the offence punishable under Ss. 409 , 465 , 467 , 468 , 466 , 470 , 471 , 406 , 420 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ( IPC ) alleges that one Chiman Sathi, Managing Director of CNSB, without any authority, opened the letter of credit in November 2000 on behalf of CNSB and that beneficiaries were companies controlled by Chiman Sathi and Himanshu Desai. It is also alleged that the loans were sanctioned by CNSB in the companies controlled by Chiman Sathi and Himanshu Desai without security and no steps were taken to recover the same. On 22/1/2003, after the investigation by the Police, a Charge- sheet was filed which was registered as Criminal Case No. 2423 of 2003 before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Anand. Thereafter, on 1/2/2003, first supplementary Charge-sheet was filed against the present revisionist which was numbered as Criminal Case No. 201 of 2003 and later on renumbered as Criminal Case No. 3047 of 2009. Again on 18/9/2006, second supplementary Charge-sheet came to be filed against one Jayesh Jagdishchandra Dave for the offence punishable under Sec. 406 , 420 and 120B IPC and the case was numbered as Special (ACB) Case No. 55 of 2006. The, case thereafter, came to be transferred from Anand Town Police Station to State CID Crime and after the investigation in the supplementary Charge-sheet a specific role of the revisionist was specified under Sec. 411 of the IPC.