- (1.) These applications have been filed for quashing of the proceedings in R.C. No. 12/EOW/86 and investigations in R.C. No. 13/EOW/86, R.C. No. 14/EOW/86 and R.C. No. 15/EOW/86 dated 17th December, 1986 under Sections 420/468/471 of the I.P.C. and Section 5(1)(d) and 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Apt., 1947. This application in R.C. No. 12/EOW/86 is taken up together with other applications being of the same nature and against the same person.
(2.) On 18.12.1986, the Deputy Manager of the Tamilnad Mercantile Bank Ltd. lodged a complaint before the superintendent of Police, Central Bureau of Investigation, Economic Offence Wing, 234/14, Acharya Jagadish Chandra Bose Road, Calcutta by writing a letter against the petitioner Pawan Kumar Ruia and others under Section 120B read with sections 420/468/471 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 5(1)(d) and 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1947 stating inter alia, as follows :- During the period from January 1984 to June 1984, Charles Solomon, the then Calcutta Branch Manager misused his official position and power and committed fraud, conspiracy and cheating in a pre-planned manner thereby cheating the said Bank with a view to secure personal gain wrongfully and dishonestly in the following manner :- i) Issuance of unauthorised overdrafts Rs. 1,00,41,745/- ii) Unauthorised credit extended through clearing cheques outstanding account Rs. 27,492/- Lakhs iii) Drawing against clearing Rs. 39,20,965/- iv) Illegal book transfers Rs. 2,21,08,000/- v) Other surreptitious and unauthorised Rs. Nil vi) Total loss Rs. 5,01,054,90/-
(3.) In the year 1983, 41 Public Limited Companies had been floated and the capital issue was in a questionable manner. Pawan Kumar Ruia, Chartered Accountant hatched up a plan to utilise the facilities of the Bank to dupe the Government into believing that the companies floated had geneuine base of promoters and in the process cheated the Government as well which can be found from the facts mentioned below :- "1. The accused P.K. Ruia was the common Chartered Accountant of all the companies which were floated. The registered offices of the companies were shown to be same in a group. When demands were made by the Bank for payment of its dues most of the letters were returned with the remark 'Not known'. All the companies which received the said letters replied in same voice, in same words. 2. It would appear on proper scrutiny that most of the Directors were more or less the same common persons. 3. The so-called promoters utilised initially many Saving Bank and Current Accounts opened by them in the Tamilnad Mecantile Bank Ltd. In all cases the basis of allotment was from the date of closure of the subscription. The allotments were made immediately and the said companies withdrew the subscription on the very same day, Mr. Solomon, acting as banker to the issue did not even bother to claim for or realise the Bank Commission and expenses and charges and thereby caused a total loss of Rs. 5,01,054,90/- in the year 1983 as such the Bank was duty bound to institute various suits to realise its dues.";