TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (11) TMI 1848
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he alleged loss caused to the Bank. In a written constitution like the one we have in India, personal liberty is a fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 which has a primacy. This fundamental right can only be curtailed by following the procedure established under law. The procedure unless it serves the purpose of law cannot be allowed to defeat the basic right. Sri S.V. Raju, learned Senior Counsel, reiterating his stand, would argue that the outstanding liability as against the accused applicants is full of doubts in the attending facts and circumstances of the case but the argument would require some more clarifications which he shall address while making submissions in rejoinder. This Court is in the midst of the arguments being advanced by Sri Amarjeet Singh Rakhra on behalf of CBI. Sri Rakhra has explained the position with respect to export booking credits by quoting the instance of one transaction out of 14 entered into between the Rotomac Global Pvt. Ltd. with Comet Overseas Pvt. Ltd. for the purpose of procurement of goods which were to be supplied to Global Pacific Services Pte. Ltd. at Singapore. The export booking credits according to the learned cou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ri S.V. Raju learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Pranjal Krishna learned counsel for the accused applicant has concluded his arguments in the bail application. Sri Amarjeet Singh Rakhra learned counsel for the C.B.I. has also concluded his arguments barring for the fact that some decisions are to be cited by him in support of the arguments advanced. Sri Chandra Shekhar Sinha learned counsel for the Bank craves for an opportunity to make some supplementary submissions with respect to the letter of credit i.e. Document D-7 attached to the chargesheet. List/put up on 30.11.2018 at 2.15 p.m. for concluding arguments. Hearing was concluded today. Having regard to the arguments made by Sri S.V. Raju, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Pranjan Krishna, who concluded his submissions on 28.11.2018, Sri Amar Jeet Singh Rakhra for the CBI and Sri Chandra Shekhar Sinha for the Bank of Baroda vis-a-vis the facts and circumstances of the case coupled with the material on record, the following order was pronounced in the open Court: "For the reasons to follow in the composite order, the bail application of Rahul Kothari is allowed whereas the bail application of Vikram Kothari ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lu, Chief Manager / Branch Head, Sri Sanjiv Jha, Sr. Manager (Forex) all staff posted at BOB, IBB, Kanpur and Shri Mangalore Devadas Mallya (M.D. Mallya) the then Chairman & Managing Director, Sri Rajiv Kumar Bakshi, the then Executive Director, Sri Atul Agarwal the then Direkctor (Part Time Non Official Director) posted at BOB, Head Office, Mumbai and unknown private persons / unknown public servants. After completion of investigation under Section 173(8) against the above mentioned accused persons, supplementary charge sheet will be filed in this Hon'ble Court in due course." The Court has heard the case of both the applicants in the light of material gathered in the charge sheet filed on 19.5.2018. The charge sheet, prima facie, makes a distinction of complicity between the two accused applicants in the backdrop of their role which each of them has severally played in the business of the Company of which they are joint beneficiaries. The distinction lies in the framing of charges itself which read as follows: (i) M/s Rotomac Global Private Limited (M/s RGPL) (A-1) u/s 420 IPC through its CMD, Sh. Vikram Kothari/ authorised representative. (ii) Sri Vikram Kothari (A-....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on his continued detention which impinges upon the personal liberty of the accused applicant who is to face trial. In nutshell, it is argued that the same very ground on which the co-accused is entitled to be granted bail, in equal measure, is applicable to the case of Vikram Kothari, therefore, he may also be set free. This Court would note that the advances made to M/s Rotomac Global Pvt. Ltd. have not been secured by primary or collateral security as per the mandate of Section 21 of Banking Regulation Act, 1949. The consortium of nationalised banks, prima facie, appears to have failed to secure the advances by adhering to the condition of primary security/margins and even not to the extent of collateral Securities despite the fact that there exists a pervasive control of the Ministry of Finance and Reserve Bank of India. The Court may strike a note of caution that the public money in the pursuit of windfall profits by the persons of creditworthiness, cannot be advanced in dark and without ensuring cent percent security. This Court would, therefore, not lose sight of the fact that the creditworthiness of the Company has come under the cloud on the basis of alleged misrepresenta....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....my humble view, is uncalled for once the fact situation of the present case is dealt with by recording reasons in the discretionary exercise of powers. Insofar as the decisions cited by learned counsel for CBI are concerned, emphasis has been laid on the nature of offences being economic. It is urged that the apex court in the matters of this category of offences has not disapproved the apprehensions of investigating agency and curtailing the right of personal liberty has been dealt with firmly and without attaching more importance to the right of personal liberty which each offender may claim. This submission advanced by learned counsel for CBI is not convincing for the reason that no material has been supplemented against the accused applicants after filing of the charge sheet on 19.5.2018 and the accused applicants are languishing in jail since last more than nine months without any progress in the trial. This Court while dealing with the right of personal liberty must have due regard to such a fundamental right of a citizen and the procedure established by law has to be essentially weighed of which the premise cannot be founded on mere apprehensions. That apart, for any such ....