Dismissed

Madhavpura Mercantile Cooperative Bank Ltd. (Under Liquidatio v. State of Gujarat

Gujarat HC7 Dec 2018SCR.A/1120/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

No issues left open by the appellate bench. Both special criminal applications filed by the Bank challenging the reversal of its appeals were dismissed as maintainable. The bank's revisions were rightly rejected because CBI revisions were pending. The CBI's pending revision was directed to be heard expeditiously. Petitions dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Both petitions dismissed; CBI revision directed to be heard expeditiously.

Madhavpura Mercantile Cooperative Bank Ltd. (Under Liquidatio Vs State of Gujarat — Gujarat HC (2018) — LawSathi Research

¶1

R/SCR.A/1119/2013 ORDER

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

¶3

R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1119 of 2013

¶4

With

¶5

R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1120 of 2013

¶6

================================================================

¶7

MADHAVPURA MERCANTILE COOPERATIVE BANK LTD (UNDER LIQUIDATIO

¶8

Versus

¶9

STATE OF GUJARAT

¶10

================================================================

¶11

Appearance:

¶12

MR DHANESH PATEL FOR MR. BHADRISH S RAJU(6676) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1

¶13

MR RC KODEKAR(1395) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 2 MS KRINA CALLA, APP for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1

¶14

MR NANDISH THAKKAR FOR THAKKAR AND PAHWA ADVOCATES(1357) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 3

¶15

===============================================================

¶16

CORAM: HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE BELA M. TRIVEDI

¶17

Date : 07/12/2018

¶18

ORAL ORDER

¶19

Both the petitions filed by the petitioner-Bank arise out of the common order dated 29.09.2012 passed by the Special Judge, CBI Court No. 2 below Exhibit 17 in Criminal Revision Application No. 9 of 2011 and below Exhibit 14 in Criminal Revision Application No. 2 of 2012.

¶20

After having heard the learned Advocates appearing for the parties, it appears that the Criminal Revision Application No. 9 of 2011 was filed by the petitioner Madhupura Mercantile Cooperative Bank Ltd. and Criminal Revision Application No. 8 of 2011 was filed by the CBI before the Revisional Court challenging the order 30.07.2011 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Special Court No.2 Ahmedabad, Rural, discharging the accused No. 8-

¶21

Page 1 of 3

¶22

R/SCR.A/1119/2013 ORDER

¶23

Dharmesh Doshi from the Criminal Case No. 132/2004. The said Dharmesh Doshi had made an application below Exhibit 17 in Criminal Revision Application 9 of 2011 raising preliminary objection regarding maintainability of the Criminal Revision Application No. 9 of 2011 filed by the Bank. The petitioner Bank had also filed Criminal Revision Application No. 2 of 2012 and the CBI had filed Criminal Revision Application No. 6 of 2012 challenging the order dated 30.11.2011 passed by the Special CBI Court discharging another accused Mukesh Champaklal from the said Criminal Case No. 132/2004. The said Mukesh Champaklal had made an application at Exhibit 14 in Criminal Revision Application No.2 of 2012 challenging the locus standi of the bank to file the revision application and the maintainability of the revision application. Both the applications were heard by the Revisional Court and the same have been allowed by holding that the Criminal Revision Application nos. 9 of 2011 and 2 of 2012 were not maintainable. Being aggrieved by the said order, these Special Criminal Applications have been filed by the petitioner Bank.

¶24

It is sought to be submitted by Mr. Patel appearing for the petitioner- Bank that Revision Applications filed by the Bank were maintainable as the bank was the aggrieved party against the orders of discharge passed by the Trial Court. However the learned Advocate Mr. Thakkar for the respondent accused submits that the concerned accused have already settled the disputes with the bank by making the payments and even otherwise the Revision Applications filed by the CBI are already pending before the Revisional Court.

¶25

Having regard to the submissions made by the learned Advocates appearing for the parties and to the impugned order passed by the Revsiional Court, it appears that the CBI has already filed the Revision Applications against the orders passed by the Special CBI

¶26

Page 2 of 3

¶27

R/SCR.A/1119/2013 ORDER

¶28

Court discharging the accused Dharmesh Doshi and Mukesh Champaklal from the Criminal Case No. 132/2004, which are pending before the Revisional Court. Since the bank had filed separate revision applications against the orders of discharge, the Revisional Court has rightly dismissed the said revision applications as being not maintainable. The impugned order being just and proper, no interference is called for. However the revision applications filed by the CBI is directed to be heard as expeditiously as possible.

¶29

Subject to the aforesaid direction, both the petitions are dismissed.

¶30

(BELA M. TRIVEDI, J)

¶31

SINDHU NAIR

¶32

Page 3 of 3

Madhavpura Mercantile Cooperative Bank Ltd. (Under Liquidatio v. State of Gujarat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Madhavpura Mercantile Cooperative Bank Ltd. (Under Liquidatio v. State of Gujarat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Patel Vikas Mahendrabhai Vs State of Gujarat

Shailendrasinh Shankarsinh Vaghela Vs State of Gujarat

Falguniben Swapan Dineshchandra Patel Vs State of Gujarat

Devesh Bhatt Vs Principal Secretary

Madhavpura Mercantile Cooperative Bank Ltd. (Under Liquidatio Vs State of Gujarat

Svayam Anandji Guru Mahanandji Avdhootji Vs State of Gujarat