LAWS(BOM)-2024-1-108

CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Vs. R. BHUVANESWARI

Decided On January 09, 2024
CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Appellant
V/S
R. Bhuvaneswari Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since common issues are involved in the two Writ Petitions filed by the accused and in Criminal Revision Application No.297 of 2023 filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation ('CBI', for short) these matters are being disposed of by a common judgment by consent of the parties. For convenience I have preferred to hear Criminal Revision Application No.297 of 2023 filed by the CBI in the first instance as the decision in this Criminal Revision Application will govern the fate of the other two writ petitions.

(2.) CBI impugns the order dtd. 26/9/2018 passed by the Special Judge for CBI, Mumbai ('Special Judge', for short) thereby discharging the present respondent/original accused No.6-R. Bhuvaneswari w/o C.N. Venkataraman in CBI Special Case No.67 of 2013. The prosecution case in brief is as under :-

(3.) The respondent-R. Bhuvaneswari in the Criminal Revision Application at the relevant time was working as Senior Manager/Chief Manager, Syndicate Bank, Regional Office, Pune. The CBI conducted the investigation in the matter of SIPL and sought sanction of prosecution of the accused vide letter dtd. 20/10/2010 enclosing their report in support thereof from the Chief Vigilance Officer ('CVO', for short) of the Syndicate Bank. Thereafter, the CVO referred the matter to the concerned Competent Authority through the Industrial Relation Division of the Bank. The Competent Authority of Bank duly examined the request of CBI with the report of CBI. The Competent Authority i.e. the General Manager Personnel after duly examining the report of CBI and the materials placed before it, concluded about non-existence of any criminal conspiracy, refused to grant sanction for prosecution of the accused. The CVO, who is the complainant in this case, after going through the note dtd. 10/1/2011 concurred with the opinion of the Competent Authority and forwarded the same to CBI. By a communication dtd. 13/1/2011 the bank communicated refusal of sanction to prosecute the accused to Central Vigilance Commission ('CVC', for short).