1537592335_qcL4PK_Webp_net_resizeimage_2_.jpg 
It was argued by the advocates appearing for the Wadhawan Brother, that their clients were never arrested during the course of the investigation. It was further argued that the chargesheet originally filed before the Trial court did not name their clients as 'accused'
Photo Credit :
A Delhi court on Friday granted bail to Dheeraj Rajesh Wadhawan and Kapil Rajesh Wadhawan, former promoters of Dewan Housing Finance Corporation Ltd (DHFL) in the alleged multi crore scam case.
Advocate Vijay Aggarwal appearing for Dheeraj Wadhawan and Sr Advocate Rebecca John along with the Advocate Yugant Sharma appearing for Kapil Wadhawan argued the Bail Applications.
Additional Sessions Judge Reetesh Singh while granting bail on Friday said, ""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."
It was argued by the advocates appearing for the Wadhawan Brother, that their clients were never arrested during the course of the investigation. It was further argued that the chargesheet originally filed before the Trial court did not name their clients as 'accused.'
Senior public prosecutor appearing for the Economic Offences Wing of the Delhi Police and the Advocate appearing for the Complainants opposed the bail applications and argued that the complainants were flat buyers in the project "Shubhkamna - Advert Techomes" at Noida.
The public prosecutor further argued that DHFL allowed Shubhkamna Buildtech to divert public money and loan amount sanctioned by DHFL to individual home buyers back to DHFL through an escrow account causing wrongful gain to the DHFL and wrongful loss to the home buyers.
Wadhawan Brothers' counsel also took on record that the investigating fficer in this case did not carry out the investigation properly and the complainant had, therefore, moved the High Court praying for change of the investigating officer.