Kapil Sudhir Vhora And Ors. vs. The State Of Maharashtra

Held

The Court held that there is a strong prima facie case against the petitioners for the offences alleged in the FIR. The reasoning was based on the fact that the Axis Bank account was frozen, and the application to defreeze it was rejected by the Metropolitan Magistrate on July 7, 2021. The petitioners were aware of this rejection, yet they proceeded to transfer a significant amount of money shortly thereafter. The Court found it surprising that the petitioners did not verify the claim made by Sudhir Sarode that the court had permitted the payment of government dues, especially when the application for transfer was sent through Sarode's messenger. The Court concluded that the petitioners knowingly joined hands with the main accused to illegally transfer public money, thereby giving undue advantage to Sarode and causing monetary loss to the victims of the earlier crime. The Court found no substance in the petitioners' claim of acting bonafidely, stating that such offences shatter customer confidence in private banks and require thorough investigation. Therefore, the petition was dismissed.

Facts

The petitioners, employees of Axis Bank, are accused in FIR No. 495 of 2021 registered at Baramati City Police Station for offences under Sections 188, 409, 420 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The FIR stems from the defreezing of a bank account containing Rs. 2,67,99,671.11, which was frozen in connection with a previous case (Crime No. 324 of 2020). The petitioners allegedly defreezed the account upon an application by the main accused, Sudhir Sarode, and transferred Rs. 1,26,88,248.00 to the GST department to save a potential fine. This action was taken despite a Metropolitan Magistrate's rejection of Sarode's application to defreeze the account on July 7, 2021. The petitioners claim they acted in good faith based on Sarode's representation that the court had directed the defreezing.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioners, by defreezing a frozen bank account and transferring funds to the GST department, have committed offences punishable under Sections 188, 409, 420 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, thereby warranting the quashing of the FIR? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioners contended that they acted in good faith upon the application and instructions of the main accused, Sudhir Sarode, who falsely represented that the court had directed the account to be defreezed and the amount transferred to the GST department. They argued that they were not concerned with Sarode's alleged fraud, did not benefit from the transaction, and therefore, the offences under Sections 188, 409, 420, and 34 of the IPC are not made out against them. They claimed to be falsely implicated. Respondent's arguments: The State argued that the FIR text provides sufficient material to indicate that the petitioners and the main accused are equally responsible for the crime, establishing a prima facie case against the petitioners.