Supreme Court Granted Anticipatory Bail in Bank Fraud Case.

On dated 20th March 2023 , Supreme Court of India in Mahdoom Vs CBI allowed the anticipatory bail of appellants in a Bank fraud case of Rs. 92 crore.

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad rejecting the applications for anticipatory bail filed by accused Nos. 2, 3, 10 and 14 in FIR No. RC 219 2019 E0006, which was investigated by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). The accused had challenged the rejection of their bail applications in separate appeals.

The First Information Report (FIR) in this case was filed on 29 June 2019, on the basis of a complaint by Corporation Bank, alleging offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 read with Section 120B IPC and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The complaint alleged that M/s NaftoGaz India Pvt. Ltd., a company which had secured credit facilities from a consortium of banks led by the State Bank of India, had conspired with advocates and valuers hired by the banks and committed fraud.

The accused included the promoter/director of M/s NaftoGaz India Pvt. Ltd., a third party who had given his personal guarantee for the loan, a person who had allegedly created bogus bills and fake lorry receipts, and a person who had allegedly operated the account of a firm to whom a huge amount had been transferred from the account of another firm.

Although the FIR was filed in June 2019, none of the accused was taken into custody by the CBI. All the accused had joined the investigation and cooperated with the CBI. After the completion of the investigation, the CBI filed the final report on 31 December 2021. The Special Court issued summons for the appearance of the accused on 7 March 2022, and the accused filed applications for anticipatory bail, which were rejected by the Special Court and the High Court.

The accused challenged the orders of the High Court rejecting their bail applications in separate appeals. The Supreme Court heard the appeals.

The court noted that the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) was not seeking their custody, but the appellants were apprehending arrest by the trial court, which had a practice of remanding accused persons to custody. The court further examined the cases against the prime accused and found that most of them were related to non-payment of financial dues and only one was filed by the CBI. Based on these factors, the court granted bail to the appellants, subject to certain terms and conditions.

MAHDOOM BAVA VS  CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION