TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (6) TMI 1098
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....estigation is now being conducted. During the course of investigation, the Serious Fraud Investigation Office, had issued summons dated 05.11.2020. Assailing the said notice and apprehending arrest, the petitioner filed Crl.P.No.5980 of 2020 before this Court, seeking anticipatory bail and this Court by an order, dated 18.03.2D21 granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner. While things stood thus, the respondent Agency had issued impugned summons dated 11.05.2021 directing the petitioner to appear before the respondent on 03.06.2021 in connection with the case, which is under investigation under the provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (for short "the P.M.L. Act"). 3. Heard Sri V.R.Machavaram, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Sri B.Narasimha Sharma, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent and perused the record. 4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and he is falsely implicated in the case and was not associated with any fraudulent activity in regard to the sanction of loans. The loans sanctioned to the borrowers M/S. VNR Infrastructures Limited were in accordance with the norms and guidelines in vogue. Ev....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.....C.I. Limited was neither in a position to call the shots nor an authority to sanction the loans on his own, is now being summoned by the respondent completely taking an 'U' turn from it's own stand that no proceedings were being initiated against the loanee as stated supra, only to harass the petitioner. It is also submitted that the respondent having taken stand of not investigating against the borrower, which is the alleged beneficiary as per the C.B.I. investigation, cannot go back from it's own undertaking given before this Court in W.P.No.21103 of 2020 by issuing summons to this petitioner, which indirectly amounts to breach of undertaking any they are estopped from the undertaking which was recorded by this Court in the above case. It is further submitted that the petitioner is ready to cooperate with the investigation being conducted by the respondent and that he had no intention to flee away from the institutions and the investigating agency and the C.B.I. also never complained to the Court that the petitioner never cooperated with the investigating agency. The petitioner is ready to abide by any condition that may be imposed in the event of his enlargement....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... further submitted that W.P.No.21103 of 2020 was filed by V.Narayana Reddy, Managing Director of M/s. VNRIL questioning the vires of the Reserve Bank of India circular dated 01.07.2016 and basing on which the banks from whom he had obtained loans and defaulted, declared his loan accounts as fraud. The R.B.I., C.B.I. and Enforcement Directorate were also made as respondents in the said W.P. In the said W.P., the respondent filed a counter stating that they had neither issued summons nor initiated prosecution against V.Narayana Reddy and further the respondent had categorically stated that the investigation initiated against the petitioner at Bangalore was transferred and merged to the investigation conducted at Hyderabad by the respondent herein. The respondent had never taken the stand that the borrower, who is the alleged beneficiary as per the C.B.I. investigation, was not investigated. The petitioner with an intention to cover his misdeeds done by him while he was working as Deputy General Manager of M/s. I.F.C.I.L., is attempting to misled the Court by misinterpreting the order of this Court. In view of the observation made by this Court in paragraph No.2 of the order dated 01.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ctors are to be taken into consideration while considering an application for bail:- (i) the nature of accusation and the severity of the punishment in the case of conviction and the nature of materials relied upon by the prosecution; (ii) reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witnesses or apprehension of threat to the complainant or the witnesses; (iii) reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused at the time of trial or the likelihood of his abscondence; (iv) character behaviour and standing of the accused and the circumstances which are peculiar to the accused; (v) larger interest of the public or the State and similar other considerations. There is no hard and fast rule regarding grant or refusal to grant bail. Each case has to be considered on the facts and circumstances of the case and on its own merits. The discretion of the Court has to be exercised judiciously and not in an arbitrary manner. 9. A perusal of the material on record would show that basing on the complaints lodged by the I.F.C.I. alleging cheating and other offences in respect of to V.N.R. Infrastructures Limited, Hyderabad and Sri Krishna Stockists and Traders Private Li....