Rs 2\,654 cr bank fraud case: DPIL promoters withdraw bail plea from Gujarat HC



Rs 2,654 cr bank fraud case: DPIL promoters withdraw bail plea from Gujarat HC

Amit Bhatnagar (L) and Sumit Bhatnagar

Amit Bhatnagar (L) and Sumit Bhatnagar

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has submitted before the Gujarat High Court that it requires another three months to complete the probe in the Rs 2,654 crore bank fraud case involving the promoters of Vadodara-based Diamond Power Infrastructure Limited (DPIL).

The submissions were made in response to the court's query to the probe agency while deciding the bail plea filed by DPIL's—Sumit and Amit Bhatnagar.

Following the submission, the court expressed its reluctance to provide bail to the Bhatnagar brothers, after which the duo found it better to withdraw the petition on Tuesday rather than drawing any adverse order and challenge the same before the Supreme Court. The court, while allowing them to withdraw the petition, gave them the liberty to file a fresh application for bail after the CBI completes its investigation in the case.

While the CBI had vehemently opposed the bail plea of the duo in the court citing pending investigation, the petitioners' advocate Yatin Oza had sought bail on the ground that charge sheet had been already filed in the case. Oza had earlier contended before the court that the various properties of the accused had been already put up before the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT). He had submitted that NCLT had appointed a resolution professional to deal with the properties, to sell them, and use the funds for repayment to the banks.

CASE DETAILS

  • The Bhatnagar brothers had moved the HC after their bail plea was rejected by a special CBI court in May 2018. CBI had registered a criminal case in March 2018 against the Bhatnagar brothers and their father Suresh, promoters of DPIL, for fraudulently availing credit facilities from a consortium of 11 banks since 2008, leaving behind an outstanding debt of Rs 2654.40 crore as on June 29, 2016. CBI had further alleged that the company and its directors managed to get credit facilities despite the fact that they were already featuring in the Reserve Bank of India’s defaulter’s list.