S PAREEMALAM Vs. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has filed the petition to direct the respondent to register a case on the basis of the complaint dated 21. 06. 2004 and to investigate and file a final report.

(2.) THE case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is engaged in the business of export and import and is carrying on the business in the name and style of Verismo Impex; that the petitioner is the Proprietrix of Verismo Impex; that the Letter of Credit is a document of the issuing bank and the same is issued for effecting guaranteed payments to the exporter (Supplier) on behalf of the importer (purchaser); that therefore when Letter of Credit is opened, it is presumed that the bank has done with due diligence as to the applicant of the Letter of Credit and also as to the genuineness and the veracity of the receiver of the goods; that in the present case, the Supreme Impex is the applicant of the Letter of Credit and they had requested Indian Overseas Bank, Singapore to open a Letter of Credit and that the goods are to be sent to M/s Upkar Corporation at Malaysia; that accordingly, Indian Overseas Bank, Singapore had issued a letter of Credit and under the said Letter of Credit, M/s. Aishwarya and Company as a beneficiary were to send goods to M/s. Upkar Corporation at Malaysia; that the petitioner submits that she had got the Letter of Credit transferred in her name from M/s. Aishwarya and Company only for the reason that the said Letter of Credit was issued by Indian Overseas Bank, Singapore and further believed that Indian Overseas Bank, Singapore would have done the same with due diligence as to the existence of M/s. Upkar Corporation in Malaysia in the address mentioned in the Letter of Credit; that the petitioner submits that believing M/s. Upkar Corporation existed in Malaysia at the address mentioned in the Letter of Credit, the petitioner had sent the shipment to Malaysia under the Letter of Credit but to the petitioner's shock she had found that M/s. Upkar Corporation never existed in the said address; that the petitioner submits that only after filing the case in the subordinate court in Singapore, it has come to her knowledge that even before opening the Letter of Credit Supreme Impex and Aishwarya and company had entered into an agreement as not to negotiate the said Letter of Credit and the same could be negotiated unless the full fund are first remitted by way of telegraphic transfer to Supreme Impex account; that Indian Overseas Bank, Singapore as part of conspiracy had aided and abetted the crime by opening a Letter of Credit knowing very well that M/s. Upkar Corporation never existed in Malaysia on the date of opening the Letter of Credit and this had been done deliberately to aid Supreme Impex in opening a Letter of Credit which never intended to do business.

(3.) HEARD the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Special Public Prosecutor for CBI as well.