ASHOO SURENDRANATH TEWARI Vs. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, EOW, CBI AND ORS.
LAWS(SC)-2020-9-48
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Decided on September 08,2020

Ashoo Surendranath Tewari Appellant
VERSUS
The Deputy Superintendent Of Police, Eow, Cbi And Ors. Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

P S RAJYA VS. STATE OF BIHAR [REFERRED TO]
RADHESHYAM KEJRIWAL VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL [REFERRED TO]



Cited Judgements :-

VIPIN KUMAR GUPTA VS. XXX [LAWS(DLH)-2022-7-35] [REFERRED TO]
A. L. JAYARAMU VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [LAWS(KAR)-2021-7-156] [REFERRED TO]
J.RAJESH KUMAR VS. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION [LAWS(KER)-2021-10-88] [REFERRED TO]
K.K. VASHISHTH VS. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH [LAWS(CHH)-2022-9-18] [REFERRED TO]
KANHAIYA LAL SARASWAT VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2021-6-14] [REFERRED TO]
INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK VS. OM PRAKASH LAL SRIVASTAVA [LAWS(SC)-2022-1-59] [REFERRED TO]
J.SEKAR @ SEKAR REDDY VS. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT [LAWS(SC)-2022-5-14] [REFERRED TO]
SANJAY S/O. LAXMAN KHOLAPURKAR VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2021-9-340] [REFERRED TO]
JOHNSON JACOB VS. STATE [LAWS(DLH)-2022-7-90] [REFERRED TO]
RAJESH KUMAR VS. STATE OF U. P. [LAWS(ALL)-2021-8-107] [REFERRED TO]
HAMIDULLAH BHAT VS. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION [LAWS(DLH)-2021-11-79] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

R.F.NARIMAN.J. - (1.)Leave granted.
(2.)We have heard Mr. Subhash Jha, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Mr. Vikramjit Banerjee, learned ASG appearing on behalf of the respondent.
(3.)This case arises out of an FIR that was registered on 09.12.2009 as regards a MSME Receivable Finance Scheme operated by the Small Industries Development Bank of India (SIDBI). It was found that since some vendors were complaining of delay in getting their payments, SIDBI, in consultation with Tata Motors Limited, advised the vendors of Tata Motors Limited to furnish RTGS details for remittance of funds. It was found that for making payments in RTGS for various purchases made by Tata Motors Limited from one Ranflex India Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "vendor"), 12 payments amounting to Rs.1,64,17,551/- (Rupees one crore sixty four lakhs seventeen thousand five hundred fifty one only) were made through RTGS by SIDBI in the vendor's account with Federal Bank, Thriupporur. Ultimately, SIDBI was informed by the vendor that it has an account with Central Bank, Bangalore and not with Federal Bank, Thriupporur. On account of this diversion of funds, an FIR was lodged in which a number of accused persons were arrested. We are concerned with the role of the appellant who is Accused no. 9 in the aforesaid FIR.
;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.