Kapil and Dheeraj Wadhawan went to court and argued that even though it has been more than 60 days after their detention, the CBI has not yet submitted its charge sheet.
Kapil Wadhawan, the former managing director of Dewan Housing and Finance Limited (DHFL), and Dheeraj Wadhawan, the director, were denied statutory bail by a Delhi court in connection with an alleged ₹ 34,000 crore bank loan scandal.
The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) apprehended both defendants on July 19, 2022.
They appeared before the court and said that even though more than 60 days had gone since their detention, the investigation was not over and the CBI had not yet submitted its charge sheet.
The bail application claimed that as they are entitled to statutory bail under Section 167 of the Code of Criminal Procedures (CrPC), they should be released.
However, Special Judge (PC Act) Vishal Gogne of the Rouse Avenue Court ruled that the two defendants have also been charged with Section 409 (Criminal breach of trust by a public servant, or by banker, merchant, or agent) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which brings the investigation’s completion period under the jurisdiction of Section 167(2)(a)(i) of the Criminal Procedure Code, which calls for a 90-day period.
“Section 167(2)(a)(i) CrPC, which allows for a maximum of 90 days, will regulate the submission of the current charge sheet in the current inquiry. The petitioners Kapil Wadhawan and Dheeraj Wadhawan are not eligible for statutory release under Section 167(2) CrPC because the 90-day term has not yet passed in the current inquiry, which also pertains to Section 409 IPC “stated the Court.
Kapil Wadhawan, Dheeraj Wadhawan, and other defendants are accused of participating in a criminal conspiracy to defraud a group of 17 institutions headed by the Union Bank of India.
According to the allegation, the accused persuaded the consortium banks to approve loans totaling ₹ 42,871.42 crores. A significant portion of this sum is reported to have been stolen and diverted through suspected DHFL bookkeeping fraud and dishonest underpayment of the consortium banks’ legal debts.
The case further claims that the consortium banks suffered an unjustified loss of ₹ 34,615.00.
