JIMMY J. DARUWALLA Vs. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision questioning the order passed by the learned Special Judge, Mumbai, rejecting the applicant's application for discharge was taken up for final disposal at admission stage and is being disposed of by this Judgment. The applicant is the original accused No. 6 in Special Case No. 83 of 2006 before the learned Special Judge. He was working as Branch Manager of Clare Road Branch of Union Bank of India. He has been charge sheeted along with others for the offences punishable under Sections 120(B) read with Sections 420, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Indian Penal Code. M/s. Syncaps Limited had availed cash credit facility from the Union Bank of India, Clare Road Branch, Mumbai to the tune of Rs. 1,60,00,000/- by hypothecation of stocks and book debts. This was done between September, 1999 to December, 2000. The applicant took over as manager of the concerned Branch on 8th November, 2000. While taking a loan, borrower had suppressed that they were having loan account with Vijaya Bank Bhuleshwar Branch, Mumbai. They allegedly filed forged copies of audited balance sheet and property documents.

(2.) One Mr. S.K. Saraf had made a complaint in respect of cash credit facility availed by M/s. Syncaps Limited. The complainant had alleged that M/s. Syncaps Limited had duped Vijaya Bank as well as Union Bank of India. The complaint had been sent by the Regional office to carry out thorough and discreet inquiry against M/s. Syncaps Limited and to maintain confidentiality about the correspondence in respect of Mr. S.K. Saraf's complaint. On 11th December, 2000, the applicant is alleged to have obtained from M/s. Syncaps Limited a letter stating that the complaint of Mr. S.K. Saraf was baseless and lodged due to business rivalry, indicating that the contents of the complaint were divulged by the applicant to M/s. Syncaps Limited in breach of instructions by his superiors. He also caused to send a letter on 23rd December, 2000 under the signature of Mr. S.M. Wani, Accountant of the Branch to the Regional office stating that the necessary enquiry was made and that the complaint was filed due to business rivalry.

(3.) The investigation also revealed that the applicant considered a proposal for renewal of the cash credit limit and enhancement of cash credit facility in the face of apparent discrepancy in the audited balance sheet of M/s. Syncaps Limited which were not signed by qualified Chartered Accountant. On the basis of recommendation of the applicant, the Regional office sanctioned renewal of cash credit limit of Rs. 1,20,00,000/- and Rs. 40,00,000/- for FDBP under the letters of credit and confirmed contract with ECGC cover. He ignored the discrepancy in the property documents creating equitable mortgage on property bearing CTS No. 1916 part Survey No. 140/17 part, Plot No. 487 FP485 area 462.89 Sq.Meters at Vileparle(E), Mumbai. The area was wrongly shown as 6231 Sq. Feet whereas it was actually 4971 Sq. Feet. On a report by Vigilance Officer of Union Bank of India, investigation was carried out and on completion of investigation, the applicant along with several others was found to be involved in various acts for which they were eventually charge sheeted. The investigating officer obtained sanction to prosecute the applicant, since he was a public servant. He was charge sheeted along with others after sanction was accorded.