9.02.2022 Dr vs Considering The Submissions Made ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 727 AP

          HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATHI

                  MAIN CASE No. Crl.P.No.780 of 2022
                               PROCEEDING SHEET

Sl.                                                                              Office
                                        ORDER

No      DATE                                                                     Note
1.    09.02.2022 DR, J

Petitioner No.1 is accused No.2 in FIR No.RC0362022A0003 on the file of ACB, Visakhapatnam Police Station, Visakhapatnam District registered on the basis of the complaint lodged by the Dredging Corporation of India Limited on 10.12.2021 for the offences under Sections 120-B and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 13(1)(a) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Petitioner Nos.2 and 3 are the directors of petitioner No.1.

The allegations in the complaint are that there has been gross illegalities and infirmities in the process followed by petitioner No.1 and that petitioner No.1 has indulged in corrupt and criminal acts with the sole intent of causing unjust enrichment to itself at the cost of the public exchequer to a tune of 50 crores approximately.

Sri Dammalampati Srinivas, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri N.Ashwani Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in fact the petitioner No.1 has approached the NCLT and filed an application numbered as CP No.513 of 2021 and the NCLT ordered notice on 15.09.2021. The respondents have entered their appearance on 15.09.2021 and subsequently, during the pendency of CP No.513 of 2021 before the NCLT, the present complaint has been lodged. He also

Crl.P.No.780 of 2022 09-02-2022 (Contd...,)

brought to the notice of this Court that the Corporation has admitted in their letter dated 24.09.2021 that the amount of Rs.49,94,23,593/- has not been paid and shown as disputed amount in their letter. In the said factual backdrop, he insisted for interim protection, as the amount has not been transferred to the petitioner and the fact remains that the petitioner has approached the NCLT against the Corporation and the proceedings are pending before NCLT.

Sri P.Chenna Kesavulu, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent, requests time for filing counter with regard to the factual aspects and he has drawn the attention of this Court to the Judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in P.Chidambaram vs Directorate Of Enforcement (AIR 2019 SC 4198), wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court has observed that in the economic offences, the Court does not grant bail, which frustrate legal proceedings or trial. Hence, he requested not to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner and requested time to file counter on factual aspects.

Considering the submissions made by both the counsel and on perusal of the record, this Court directs the respondent to file counter within one week.

Post after one week.

In the meanwhile, the respondent authorities are directed not to take any coercive steps against the petitioner.

__________ DR, J

SDP

Crl.P.No.780 of 2022 09-02-2022 (Contd...,)