The Bombay High Court has quashed a First Information Report (FIR) filed against HDFC Bank Managing Director and CEO Sashidhar Jagdishan in connection with alleged fraud involving the Lilavati Kirtilal Mehta Medical Trust. The court ruled that the complaint was an abuse of legal process, bringing relief to the banking executive.
Court Terms Complaint ‘Abuse of Process’
A division bench of the Bombay High Court set aside the FIR, observing that the complaint filed by a trustee of the Lilavati Trust did not constitute a legitimate criminal case. The court noted that the proceedings appeared to misuse legal mechanisms, and therefore did not warrant continuation.
The FIR had named Jagdishan along with an asset reconstruction company and its senior officials, accusing them of defrauding the trust that runs Mumbai’s Lilavati Hospital.
FCRF Academy Launches Premier Anti-Money Laundering Certification Program
Allegations Linked to Financial Dispute
The case originated from allegations that Jagdishan was involved in financial misconduct, including claims of bribery and cheating linked to the internal affairs of the trust.
According to the complaint, he had allegedly accepted payments and misused his position to influence matters within the trust’s governance.
However, the court found that the complaint lacked bona fide intent. It observed that the allegations were closely tied to an ongoing financial dispute between the parties.
Dispute Rooted in Loan Recovery Proceedings
Investigations and court observations indicated that the FIR was filed in the backdrop of recovery proceedings initiated by HDFC Bank against entities linked to the complainant.
The court noted that the complaint appeared to be a “counterblast” to these recovery actions, which involved dues exceeding ₹65 crore.
This context played a significant role in the court’s decision to quash the FIR, as it raised questions about the intent behind the criminal allegations.
Relief for CEO, Probe Proceedings End
With the FIR quashed, all criminal proceedings arising from the complaint stand annulled. The decision effectively clears Jagdishan of the allegations in this case.
The ruling underscores judicial scrutiny in cases where criminal complaints may stem from commercial or financial disputes, reinforcing that criminal law cannot be used as a tool for pressure in such conflicts.
