HDFC Financial institution Managing Director and CEO Sashidhar Jagdishan has approached the Bombay Excessive Courtroom difficult the First Info Report (FIR) filed in opposition to him on a criticism by Lilavati Kirtilal Mehta Medical Belief (LKMM Belief), which oversees the Lilavati Hospital in Bandra (West), a distinguished healthcare establishment in Mumbai.
Jagdishan has moved the excessive courtroom in search of to quash the FIR which has accused him of accepting a bribe of Rs 2.05 crore to assist a bunch consisting of 1 Chetan Mehta and different erstwhile trustees to retain unlawful management over the belief.
When the matter got here up for listening to earlier than a bench of Justices A S Gadkari and Rajesh S Patil, Justice Patil recused himself from listening to the matter after which it was talked about earlier than a division bench led by Justice Sarang V Kotwal. Justice Kotwal too recused himself from listening to the matter, noting that he had earlier represented one of many trustees. The petitioner will now must strategy the excessive courtroom administration for task of one other bench.
The HDFC Financial institution CEO, via senior advocate Amit Desai, claimed that the FIR was baseless and malicious. Desai argued that the FIR was a “retaliatory transfer” as a consequence of HDFC Financial institution’s restoration proceedings initiated in opposition to Splendour Gems Restricted, an organization owned by Mehta household, which had until Could 31 defaulted on loans to the tune of Rs. 65.22 crore. He mentioned that the complainant is utilizing the “facade of Lilavati Belief to take motion in opposition to the petitioner.”
Jagdishan sought route from courtroom to quash the FIR filed in opposition to him together with setting apart of the Justice of the Peace courtroom order that initiated the probe. Pending listening to of the plea, he has sought keep on the inquiry in opposition to him and that there shouldn’t be no coercive motion together with the submitting of chargesheet in opposition to him, failing which he will “endure grave loss and irreparable damage.”
On Could 29, the Justice of the Peace courtroom had ordered the Bandra police to register offences punishable below sections 406, 409 (prison breach of belief) and 420 (dishonest) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and had directed the police to probe the matter as per part 175 (3) of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS). The Bandra police registered the FIR on Could 31.
The belief, via its authorised consultant Prashant Mehta, had filed a criticism contending that there was a mortgage restoration continuing occurring with an organization, of which the daddy of one of many current trustees was office-bearer and the HDFC Financial institution, a creditor.
Story continues under this advert
The criticism claimed that in the course of the restoration proceedings, the daddy of the mentioned trustee was harassed bodily and mentally, which resulted in his loss of life. After assuming workplace, Prashant allegedly discovered a diary exhibiting that sometimes a number of quantities had been transferred on Chetan Mehta’s instructions to Jagdishan, totalling Rs 2.05 crore. Prashant claimed that the mentioned quantity was paid by Chetan Mehta and 6 others who had been erstwhile workplace bearers of the belief, with a sole view to harass the daddy of one of many trustees.
Judicial Justice of the Peace First Class (JMFC) Komalsing Rajput, within the Could 29 order, famous the contents of the diary confirmed that quantities had been transferred sometimes, that the allegations constituted cognizable offences and the quantity concerned was “excessive”.
The Justice of the Peace famous that to confirm and accumulate proof to establish the supply of quantities and the way they had been transferred with none cause, a police probe was crucial and therefore ordered a probe by the Bandra police.
Nevertheless, Jagdishan, in his plea, claimed that the Justice of the Peace’s order was “self contradictory and flawed.” The plea said, Regardless of noting that apart from diary entries, no extra proof was produced, and the complainant Prashant Mehta was unable to furnish additional proof, the. Justice of the Peace nonetheless proceeded to direct the investigation based mostly solely on the affidavit.” Jagdishan mentioned the diary and xerox copies of selective money data was not adequate and cogent proof to take cognizance of the offence and the Justice of the Peace’s actions had been “deplorable.”
Story continues under this advert
The Bandra police had registered one other FIR on Could 31 in opposition to Chetan Mehta, M/s Phoenix ARC Personal Ltd and others for embezzlement of belief funds to the tune of Rs 2.25 crore.
Phoenix ARC, together with accused individuals Keki Elavia and Venkatu Srinivasan have additionally approached the excessive courtroom in search of quashing of the embezzlement FIR in opposition to them.
The excessive courtroom will hear the pleas sooner or later.