Vinay Sharma vs. State Nct Of Delhi

Held

The Court held that the petitioner was not entitled to bail. The Court distinguished the present FIR from the Himachal Pradesh FIR, noting that the former involved availing credit facilities of Rs. 30 Crores through forged documents, while the latter concerned VAT non-payment. The Court referred to the Supreme Court's observations in *Centrum Financial Services Limited Vs. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.*, which emphasized the importance of considering the nature and gravity of the accusation, the modus operandi involving shell companies and forged documents, and the evidence collected during the investigation. The Court found that the investigation revealed the petitioner's involvement in creating forged bills, receipts, and GRs, establishing shell companies, and manipulating accounts, as corroborated by a forensic audit. Given the gravity of the offense, the modus operandi, and the petitioner's involvement in a case of larger magnitude in Himachal Pradesh, no grounds for bail were made out. The bail application was dismissed.

Facts

The petitioner, Vinay Sharma, sought regular bail in FIR No. 92/2016, registered under Sections 420/467/468/471/120-B IPC at Police Station Barakhamba Road. The FIR was filed based on a complaint by Standard Chartered Bank alleging that Indian Technomac Company Limited (ITCOL) and its directors, including the petitioner, availed credit facilities. ITCOL allegedly failed to repay amounts paid by the bank under Letters of Credit, totaling Rs. 30 Crores. Investigations revealed that ITCOL used forged and fabricated documents, including invoices and lorry receipts, and created shell companies to inflate its turnover and deceive the bank. A prior FIR at Himachal Pradesh concerned non-payment of VAT of approximately Rs. 2100 Crores.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail in FIR No. 92/2016, considering the allegations of fraud, forgery, and the use of shell companies in availing credit facilities from Standard Chartered Bank? The petitioner argued that all related investigations had already been conducted in the FIR registered in Himachal Pradesh. The revenue (State NCT of Delhi) contended that the present FIR pertains to availing credit facilities of Rs. 30 Crores based on forged and fabricated documents, which was distinct from the Himachal Pradesh FIR concerning VAT non-payment. The prosecution relied on a Supreme Court judgment in *Centrum Financial Services Limited Vs. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.*, highlighting the gravity of offenses involving shell companies and forged documents.