A Delhi court has granted bail to Dheeraj Rajesh Wadhawan and Kapil Rajesh Wadhawan, ex-promoters of Dewan Housing Finance Corporation Ltd (DHFL) in the alleged multi crore scam case.
The Additional Sessions Judge Reetesh Singh whereas granting bail on Friday (May 13) mentioned, “in the present case as well, the applicant/accused persons- Kapil Rajesh Wadhawan and Dheeraj Rajesh Wadhawan were not arrested during the investigation. A supplementary chargesheet was filed against them without arrest. Investigation Officer (IO) in his reply to the bail applications has stated that there is no requirement of custody”.
Court famous that the mentioned case pertains to FIR registered beneath sections 420, 406, 409, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), whereby the allegations have been made in opposition to the accused Dheeraj Rajesh Wadhawan and Kapil Rajesh Wadhawan have been the administrators of DHFL throughout that point and had sanctioned mortgage to M/s Shubhkamna Buildtech Pvt. Ltd., and entered right into a tripartite settlement with the flat patrons for the project “Shubhkamna-Advert Techomes” at Sector 137, Noida, U.P. the place unsold flats have been mortgaged with DHFL they usually hid the factum of the prior cost on flats and misrepresented that these (flats) have been free from encumbrances.
Advocate Vijay Aggarwal showing for Dheeraj Wadhawan and Sr Advocate Rebecca John together with the Advocate Yugant Sharma showing for Kapil Wadhawan argued the Bail Applications.
It was argued (by the Advocates showing for the Wadhawan Brother) that their shoppers have been by no means arrested throughout the course of the investigation. It was additional argued that the chargesheet initially filed earlier than the Trial court didn’t title their shoppers as ‘Accused’.
It was acknowledged by the advocates that their shoppers are at the moment lodged in Mumbai Jail in one other FIR (Punjab and Maharashtra Co-operative Bank (PMC) fraud case) and thus there can’t be any question of fleeing from justice or tampering with any proof.
Senior Public Prosecutor showing for the Economic Offences Wing of the Delhi Police and the Advocate showing for the Complainants opposed the bail purposes and argued that the complainants have been flat patrons in the project “Shubhkamna – Advert Techomes” at Noida.
It was additional argued by Sr Public Prosecutor, “DHFL allowed M/s Shubhkamna Builtech Private Ltd. to divert public money and loan amount sanctioned by DHFL to individual home buyers were routed back to DHFL through an escrow account causing wrongful gain to the DHFL and wrongful loss to the home buyers.”
In addition to the aforesaid, the complainant’s counsel additionally took a plea that the Investigating Officer in this case didn’t perform the investigation correctly and the complainant had, due to this fact, moved the High Court praying for change of the IO.
The lawyer additionally submitted that the complainants have additional filed purposes beneath the part 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) learn with part 173 (8) for additional investigation, which is pending earlier than the Trial Court.