Naresh T Jain vs. The State Of Maharashtra

Facts

The petitioners, Anil O. Khandelwal (CFO of Cox and Kings Limited - CKL) and Naresh Tikamchand Jain (Internal Auditor of CKL), sought regular bail in connection with C.R. No.40 of 2020 registered by the Economic Offences Wing, Mumbai. They are accused along with several others for offences under Sections 406, 409, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 477A read with 120-B of the Indian Penal Code. The complaint was filed by HDFC Bank concerning CKL's default in repaying a corporate credit facility of Rs. 50.17 crores obtained between 2009 and 2019. CKL also defaulted on statutory payments, including GST and TDS. The prosecution alleges falsification of accounts and diversion of funds. Both applicants have been incarcerated since January 31, 2022. Charge-sheet has been filed.

Held

The Court held that the applicants have made out a case for bail. The reasoning was based on the principle of parity, considering the long period of incarceration of the applicants (over 3 years). The Court noted that the main accused, Ajay Ajit Peter Kerkar, had been granted bail by the Supreme Court, and Anil O. Khandelwal had also been granted bail by this Court in another matter with similar allegations. Furthermore, the Court observed that the complainant bank had advanced substantial amounts over a period of 10 years and questioned whether the bank had carried out adequate due diligence, especially given the risk involved in advancing large sums of public money. The Court stated that while the complicity of the accused would be determined at trial, considering the long incarceration and prima facie observations, bail was warranted. The Court directed the release of both applicants on bail, subject to furnishing a Personal Recognizance bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- each with sureties, reporting to the Investigating Officer when called, cooperating with the trial, not leaving Maharashtra without permission, and surrendering their passports.

Key Issues

1. Whether the applicants are entitled to regular bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, considering their long incarceration and the bail granted to the main accused and co-accused in similar matters? (Mixed question of law and fact, turning on Section 439 CrPC and principles of parity). Petitioner's Arguments: - The applicants seek bail based on parity with Ajay Ajit Peter Kerkar, the main accused, who was granted bail by the Supreme Court. They also rely on a High Court order granting bail to Anil O. Khandelwal in a different case with similar allegations and an order from the PMLA Special Court granting bail to Anil O. Khandelwal on grounds of delay and incarceration. - They argue that their further judicial custody is unwarranted as they have fully cooperated with the investigation. Revenue's Arguments: - The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the State (Respondent) against the grant of bail.