2026 (4) TMI 157

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the Provisional Attachment Order dated 10.03.2023. 2. It is a case where an FIR was registered on 22.06.2021 by the CBI, New Delhi on a complaint of State Bank of India alleging offence under Section 120-B, 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 477A of IPC, 1860 and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The ECIR was then recorded on 02.07.2021 against M/s CG Power and Industrial Solution Ltd. (M/s CGPISL), Mr. Gautam Thapar, Mr. K.N. Neelkanth, Mr. Madhav Acharya and many others and unknown public servants. 3. It was alleged that M/s CGPISL entered into agreement for purchase of Copper, Aluminum and Steel from 6 firms and transferred a sum of Rs. 3,08,30,15,250/- to those 6 firms in lieu of supply of m....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....al has been filed. Arguments of counsel for the appellant: 4. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the shares in Demat account of the appellant have been attached by the respondents without any reason and when the appellant was not named as an accused in the FIR. She was a Data Entry Operator and receiving the salary. The appellant, however, received a sum of Rs. 48 lakhs but out of it Rs. 11 Lakhs was received on 17.09.2018 and remaining Rs. 37 Lakhs on 08.05.2019 for the treatment of her father-in-law. The amount aforesaid was transferred by the company and, therefore, it could not have been attached by the respondents. The impugned order thus deserves to be set aside. 5. The learned counsel for the appellant, how....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....allegation exists against M/s CGPISL for commission of offence under the IPC,1860 and Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The allegation against the Company is involving Rs. 30,83,05,250/-. The amount aforesaid was diverted to 6 companies established by Late Bhimrao Venkata Ramana Rao to siphon off the money of M/s CGPISL. The amount aforesaid was transferred in lieu of supply of copper, aluminum, steel, etc. whereas no supply was made by the firms established by Late Bhimrao Venkata Ramana Rao. 9. So far as the appellant is concerned, she was working as Data Entry Operator in M/s CGPISL and received Rs. 48 Lakhs from the Company out of the alleged proceeds of crime. The counsel for the appellant has not denied receipt of the aforesaid a....