1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(S). OF 2024.
(Arising from SLP(Crl.)No(s).5616/2023)
BANK OF BARODA APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. RESPONDENT(S)
O R D E R
Leave granted.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant-Bank and the respondent-Union of India and the two accused persons who are arraigned as respondent nos.3 and 4. The main allegation against the respondent nos.3 and 4, in essence relates to siphoning of funds borrowed or received as cash credit facilities as also disposal of hypothecated assets from the appellant-Bank. In the order impugned, passed on 24.01.2023, interim bail was granted in the application of the respondent nos.3 and 4 under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with the following conditions:-

(i) The Bank of Baroda, Branch ROSARB, Meerut shall issue provisional No Objection Certificate in respect of properties being Shri Durga Khandsari Udyog, Ankit Goel, Ankit Goel, Fact Land & Building of Rama Agro & Food Products and Play Ground of School, for disposing them of by the accused applicants, which according to Sri Rajiv Lochan Shukla, learned counsel for the accused -applicants would fetch Rs.5,00,00,000/-.

(ii) The accused applicants will introduce the buyers co the Bank and entire transaction shall be transparent without any clandestine deal by the accused-applicants with the prospective buyers.

( iii) The Bank may appoint any observer to oversee the sale process of the aforesaid
properties.

(iv) The Bank will open No Lien Account and the sale proceeds of these aforesaid properties
would directly be deposited in the said account.
(v) Rest of the properties will be released only after disposal of the aforesaid five properties and making deposit of sale proceeds in No Lien Accounts.

(vi) After three months when the properties mentioned in (i) are disposed of and sale proceeds are deposited in No Lien Account, the accused-applicants should approach the Bank for final settlement of the accounts and approach this Court for further orders.

(vii) In the event, it is found that the accused applicants are not fair or they are not honouring the spirit of this order, the Bank as well as the C.B.I. may approach this Court at any time for cancelling this order. (viii) The accused-applicants will cooperate in the investigation which is still going on as per the stand of the C.B.I.

(ix) No Provisional Objection Certificate shall be issued after prospective buyers are introduced to the Bank by the applicants.

The appellant wants to contest the plea for anticipatory bail before the High Court but it is aggrieved by the conditions imposed in granting interim bail, particularly the first condition. It is the submission of the appellant that the High Court ought not to have assumed the role of the Debt Recovery Tribunal in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. According to the appellant, the said condition in effect constitutes drawing up of settlement terms, and the appellant is aggrieved on that count. We are satisfied that the plea of the appellant that this condition ought not to have been imposed in an interim order passed in a pre-arrest bail application and we set aside the said condition imposed by the High Court directing disposal of the assets which as per the counsel for the respondent nos.3 and 4 would have fetched Rs.5,00,00,000/-. We, however, do not disturb the order of interim bail and request the High Court, which is in seisin over the anticipatory bail application of the respondent nos.3 and 4 to hear out their plea at an early date. Till disposal of the anticipatory bail application, however, the respondent nos.3 and 4 shall not be arrested in connection with Case Crime No.RC/DST/2019/A/0005 registered with Police Station STB/CBI, New Delhi. It shall be open to the High Court, if it decides to grant anticipatory bail to the respondent nos.3 and 4, to impose any condition as may be permissible in law, barring the one which we have set aside or a condition of the same nature. The impugned order stands modified in the above terms.
The appeal stands disposed of in the above terms.
Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand
disposed of.
……………….J.
[ANIRUDDHA BOSE]
……………….J.
[SANJAY KUMAR]
New Delhi;
February 27, 2024.

ITEM NO.22 COURT NO.5 SECTION II
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.)No(s). 5616/2023
(Arising out of impugned interim order dated 24-01-2023 in
CRMAB Application u/s 438 CR.P.C. No. 5112/2022 passed by the
High Court Of Judicature At Allahabad)
BANK OF BARODA PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. RESPONDENT(S)
Date : 27-02-2024 This petition was called on for hearing
today.
CORAM :
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA BOSE
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR
For Petitioner(s) Ms. Asiya Khan, AOR
Mr. Kush Sharma, Adv.

For Respondent(s) Mr. Abhinav Ramkrishna, AOR
Mr. Manav Vohra, Adv.
Ms. Samina Thakur, Adv.
Ms. Anjali Chauhan, Adv.

Mr. K M Nataraj, A.S.G. (NP)
Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR
Mr. M K Maroria, AOR,
Mr. Yuvraj Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Rajan Kumar Chourasia, Adv.
Mr. Saurav Roy, Adv.
Mr. Sharath Nambiar, Adv.
Mr. Gaurang Bhushan, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Leave granted.
The appeal is disposed of in terms of the signed order,
which is placed on the file.
Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
(NIRMALA NEGI) (VIDYA NEGI)
COURT MASTER (SH) ASSISTANT REGISTRAR