2022 (7) TMI 583

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....IO. JASMEET SINGH, J (ORAL) CRL.M.A. 12890/2022 in BAIL APPLN. 2053/2022, CRL. M.A. 12892 in BAIL APPPLN. 2055/2022 and CRL. M.A. 12893 in BAIL APPLN. 2056/2022. Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application stands disposed of. BAIL APPLN. 2053/2022, BAIL APPLN. 2055/2022 and BAIL APPLN. 2056/2022 1. These are applications under Section 439 Cr.P.C filed on behalf of accused Nos. A-195 - Ashok Kumar Makhija, A-193 - Mithilesh Kumar Jha and A-194 - Ravinder Kumar Nagpal (hereafter accused persons shall be referred to as 'A-195', 'A-193' and 'A-194' respectively) for grant of bail in respect of offences committed under Sections 447 of the Companies and under Section 409 IPC in Complaint Case No. 770/2019. 2. Issue n....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tter, Vijay Madanlal Chaudhary & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors. Dated 18.08.2021[MANU/SCOR/25854/2021]. c. Additionally, the same summoning order dated 16.08.2019 has been quashed by a coordinate bench of this court against Dr. Rajesh Kumar Yaduvanshi, who was a Nominee Director appointed PNB on the board of BSL. [Dr. Rajesh Kumar Yaduvanshi v. SFIO, CRL. REV.P. No. 1308 of 2019 vide order dated 21.09.2020]. d. Co-accused, Mr. Pankaj Mahajan who is also a practicing Chartered Accountant at the firm, M/s. A.C. Gupta & Associates is also admitted on bail by a coordinate bench of this court in BAIL APPLN No. 1813 of 2022 titled Pankaj Mahajan v. SFIO dated 29.06.2022. e. A coordinate bench of this court also enlarged Rupesh Purwar, co-acc....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....eing any protection in favour of the Applicants. There is also no reason shown for seeking judicial custody of the Applicants. 9. Since the applicants have already retired and similarly situated persons have already been granted bail, especially, the main accused Nitin Johri and Neeraj Singhal, therefore, the applicants also need to be enlarged on bail. 10. As regards the legal embargo of Section 212(6), I am of the view that Sub-section-(i) has duly been complied with, as the Public Prosecutor (Ld. CGSC) has been given a chance to oppose the bail applications. I am prima facie of the view that the Applicants are not guilty of the offence of which they are charged with, and therefore, I am also of the opinion, that they are not likely to ....