Dismissed

Kaushal Kishore Sharma v. C.B.I.,Acb

Allahabad HC20 Jan 2020A482/2725/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. filed to quash orders framing charges in a corruption case. Court held there was no force in the application, as settlement with the bank does not extinguish criminal liability. Trial court directed to expedite trial within one year due to gravity of offence.

What did the court decide?

Application quashing the order framing charge dismissed. Trial court directed to conclude trial within one year.

Kaushal Kishore Sharma Vs C.B.I.,Acb — Corruption | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 66

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2725 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Kaushal Kishore Sharma Opposite Party :- C.B.I.,Acb Counsel for Applicant :- Ashwini Kumar Awasthi,Manish Tiwary(Senior Adv.),Syed Imran Ibrahim Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sanjay Kumar Yadav

¶4

Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Manish Tiwary, learned senior counsel assisted by Sri Syed Imran Ibrahim, counsel for the applicant and Sri Gyan Prakash, learned senior counsel assisted by Sri Sanjay Kumar Yadav, counsel for C.B.I.

¶6

The present application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the impugned order dated 15.7.2019 as well as impugned order dated 9.8.2019 passed by Special Judge, Anti Corruption, C.B.I. Ghaziabad in Special Case no. 10 of 2012 (CBI vs. Manoj Srivastava and others) in R.C. No. 1202010A0010, u/s 120-B, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC and Section 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act,P.S. C.B.I., ACB, Ghaziabd.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that C.B.I. has not conducted the investigation impartially and without cross checking profit and loss account and balance sheets entry of the applicant's company has submitted charge-sheet in a routine manner. Besides it, learned senior counsel has strenuously argued that CC limit was granted on 15.11.2008 and the applicant on being served notice by the bank has already entered into one time settlement and repaid entire dues including interest and the said fact is also stated in the impugned charge-sheet by the C.B.I. It is thus argued that since the matter has already been settled between the bank and the applicant and no liability is existing towards the bank, framing of charge by the court below and continuance of proceedings is nothing but an abuse of process of law, therefore, the impugned order whereby charge is framed, may be quashed.

¶8

Per contra, learned senior counsel appearing for C.B.I. has vehemently argued that merely because the applicant has entered into one time settlement with the bank on that basis entire liability and order of framing charge cannot be quashed. Besides it, he has submitted that investigation has revealed that Sri Manoj Srivastava in furtherance of the said criminal conspiracy with Sri Kaushal Kishore Sharma Prop. of M/s

¶9

Surindera Electricals and by abusing his official position as a public servant accepted the false Audit reports, Balance Sheets, Trading Profit and Loss account as on 31.3.2006, 31.3.2007, 31.3.2008, forged statement of account of Corporation Bank, Janakpuri,New Delhi and forged sale tax return submitted by the borrower. The false financial papers were prepared by Sri Surendra Kumar Shukla, Chartered Accountant in conspiracy with the borrower. He has argued that at the stage of framing of charge only prima facie evidence has to be looked into by the court and the impugned order clearly reflects that application of mind was applied by the trial court on the basis of evidence collected by the I.O., therefore, the present application is bereft of merit and the same is liable to be dismissed.

¶10

Considering the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, I do not find any force in the application. The application is accordingly dismissed.

¶11

I may record that the order impugned was passed in pursuance of order dated 15.7.2019 whereby discharge application was rejected and charge was framed on 9.8.2019. Keeping in view nature and gravity of offence especially the manner in which the Bank Manager in collusion with borrower has caused huge loss to the bank, I deem it fit to directed the concerned court to expedite and conclude the trial within a period of one year from the date of production of certified copy of the order.

¶12

Order Date :- 20.1.2020 Dhirendra/

Kaushal Kishore Sharma v. C.B.I.,Acb

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kaushal Kishore Sharma v. C.B.I.,Acb

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Saroj Vs State of U.P.

Chheddu Vs State of U.P.

Pawan Singh Vs State of U.P.

Balram Singh Vs State of U.P.

Sunil Kesarwani Vs State of U.P.

Ravi Kumar Alias Sudeep Pratap Singh Vs State of U.P.