The Delhi High Court has upheld the statutory bail granted to Kapil Wadhawan and his brother Dheeraj, former promoters of Dewan Housing Finance Corporation Limited (DHFL), in connection with a bank loan scam case. The court dismissed the Central Bureau of Investigation's (CBI) petition challenging the trial court's order, stating that the decision to grant bail was based on sound reasoning and logic. The court emphasized that considering an incomplete charge sheet as a final report to deny bail would be against the law and violate the constitutional right to personal liberty.
The Delhi High Court has upheld the statutory bail granted to former Dewan Housing Finance Corporation Limited (DHFL) promoters, Kapil Wadhawan and his brother Dheeraj, in connection with a multi-crore rupees bank loan scam case. The court dismissed the petition filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) challenging the trial court's order from December 3 of the previous year.
Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma, in his ruling, stated that the decision to grant bail to the accused was based on sound reasoning and logic. He also pointed out that the charge sheet filed by the CBI was incomplete and should not be considered a final report on the investigation. According to the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), if the investigation is not completed within a specified time, the accused must be released on bail.
The court emphasized that considering the incomplete charge sheet as a final report to deny statutory bail would go against the law and the Constitution. Such an action would negate the provisions of Section 167 of the CrPC and would be in violation of Article 21 of the Constitution, which guarantees the fundamental right to life and personal liberty.
The judge further stated that there was no illegality or perversity in the order issued by the learned Sessions Judge, and therefore upheld the order. The Wadhawan brothers had been arrested in July of the previous year.
In a 53-page order, the court highlighted the importance of a speedy trial as a fundamental right of individuals. It emphasized that investigations should be completed in a timely manner to ensure that the trial process begins and concludes expeditiously. The court also noted that while the police have the right to conduct further investigations, they cannot use this as a pretext to file an incomplete report solely to prevent the granting of statutory bail.
Despite acknowledging the seriousness of the allegations against the accused, the court found that the material collected by the investigating agency so far was insufficient. It emphasized that if the current report is considered a complete investigation regarding the accused, the investigating agency would face significant challenges.
Additionally, the court supported the trial court's observation that the legislature should consider provisions for extending the time granted for the completion of investigations in serious offenses. However, it clarified that it did not delve into the merits of the case.
The charge sheet in this case was filed on October 15, 2022, and cognizance was taken. The case originated from a complaint made by the Union Bank of India, alleging a criminal conspiracy involving DHFL, Kapil Wadhawan, Dheeraj Wadhawan, and other accused individuals. The complaint stated that the accused induced the consortium of 17 banks, led by the Union Bank of India, to sanction substantial loans totalling Rs 42,871.42 crore. It was alleged that a significant portion of this amount was misappropriated through the falsification of DHFL's books and dishonest default in repayment.
The complainant further claimed that the consortium banks suffered a wrongful loss of Rs 34,615 crore as of July 31, 2020. The CBI is investigating these allegations and pursuing legal action against the accused individuals involved in the bank loan scam.
Overall, the Delhi High Court's decision to uphold the statutory bail granted to the Wadhawan brothers in the bank loan scam case rests on the incomplete charge sheet filed by the CBI and the necessity to ensure a speedy trial process. The court has emphasized the importance of completing investigations within the prescribed timeframe and has called for provisions to extend investigation periods in serious offenses.
Advertisement
Facebook
Whatsapp
