In a notable turn of events, a Delhi court has acquitted 9 individuals, comprising a company and four bank officials, in a case dating back nine years, connected to an alleged Rs 4.8 crore fraud against Canara Bank.
The case, which dates back to 2011, finally saw its trial initiated in 2015.
Special Judge Hasan Anzar of Rouse Avenue Court delivered the verdict, acquitting Harpreet Fashion Pvt. Ltd, Mohanjit Singh Mutneja, Gunjit Singh Mutneja, Harpreet Kaur Mutneja, Harmendra Singh, Raman Kumar Agarwal, Darwan Singh Mehta, T G Purshottam, and C T Ramkumar.
Judge Criticizes CBI’s ‘Casual’ Probe In Ruling
The judge, in his ruling, criticized the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) for the purported “casual” nature of its probe.
The prosecution failed to substantiate charges against the public servants or establish any conspiracy between them and the private accused, the court noted.
The CBI alleges that from 2003 to 2007, they claim four distinct criminal conspiracies were actively hatching to defraud the bank.
It claimed that funds diverted through 47 cheques to five sister companies of Harpreet Fashion, which had received loans from the bank.
Meanwhile, the court emphasized that merely issuing cheques to sister concerns doesn’t imply wrongdoing unless backed by clear evidence of fund diversion and improper end-use.
“The mere issuance of checks by an accused to its sister concern would not make much difference unless the prosecution explains the diversion of funds by cogent evidence,” the court held.
The judge also rebuked the prosecution for its alleged failure to thoroughly examine or analyze bank accounts, statements of accounts, balance sheets, and relevant income tax returns to prove any illicit activity.
It criticized the selective highlighting of a few cheques without proper context and the failure to interrogate employees from the sister companies or provide evidence of fund misappropriation.
Moreover, the court challenged the prosecution’s timeline, noting that Harpreet Fashion only commenced operations in March 2004, contrary to claims of a conspiracy starting in 2003.
It expressed dissatisfaction with the CBI’s investigation, particularly its failure to scrutinize the roles of the Circle Office and Head Office, concentrating solely on the Parliament Street Branch.
Also Read: Supreme Court Issues Stern Warning To Delhi Government Over Water Crisis
