Harshit Vanraj Merchant v. CBI Anti Corruption Branch and Anr.
Case brief
What is this about?
The court rejected an application challenging the Special Judge's order refusing to discharge an applicant charged with forgery and cheating for submitting a misleading valuation report as a bank panel valuer. The High Court held that prima facie material existed.
What did the court decide?
Application dismissed; impugned order of the trial court rejecting discharge application affirmed.
What the court decided
revn-614-17.doc
rpa 1/8
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRI. REVISION APPLICATION NO.614 OF 2017
Harshit Vanraj Merchant .. Applicant Vs. CBI Anti Corruption Branch & Anr. .. Respondents
Mr.Sudeep Pasbola a/w.Mr.Bhavesh Thakur, Mr.Karl Rustomkhan i/b. Mr.Rahul Arote, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr.H.s. Venegaonkar, Advocate for Respondent No.1 – CBI. Ms.R.M. Gadhvi, APP for the Respondent – State.
CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.
DATED : JANUARY 18, 2018.
P.C. :
This is an application challenging the order dated 20th September, 2017, passed by the Special Judge (CBI) seeking to discharge the applicant from the prosecution.
2 The applicant is being prosecuted for the offences punishable under Section 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 read with Sections 120-B, 420, 467, 468 and 41 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to be discharged from prosecution for forgery and cheating as a valuer.
Whether there is prima facie evidence to frame a charge against the applicant for conspiracy.
Whether the variation in the prosecution stand regarding the existence of the property warrants discharge.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Harshit Vanraj Merchant
- respondent
CBI Anti Corruption Branch
Coram
PRAKASH D. NAIK
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court