C.B.I. BANK SECURITIES & FRAUD CELLversusRAMESH GELLI & ORS.
- Citation
- 2016 INSC 1180
- Decided
- 2 May 2016
- Disposal
- Appeal(s) allowed
Holding
The Court held that the correct statutory provisions are Section 46A of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 and Sections 7 to 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, and ordered their substitution in the judgment.
Summary
The CBI Bank Securities & Fraud Cell appealed against the Mumbai High Court’s judgment in criminal revision applications involving Ramesh Gelli and others. The appeal contested the accuracy of statutory citations in paragraph 25 of the High Court’s order, which incorrectly referred to Section 46 of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 and Sections 7 to 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The Supreme Court examined the submissions and determined that the proper provisions are Section 46A of the Banking Regulation Act and Sections 7 to 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act. Consequently, the Court ordered the substitution of the erroneous references with the correct ones. The appeals (Criminal Appeal Nos. 1077‑1081 of 2013) were allowed, and the corrected judgment was directed to be pronounced.
Issues considered
- Whether the reference to Section 46 of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 in the impugned judgment is erroneous and should be corrected to Section 46A.
- Whether the reference to Sections 7 to 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 is erroneous and should be limited to Sections 7 to 12.
- Whether correcting these statutory citations warrants allowing the criminal appeals.
Legislation cited
- Banking Regulation Act, 1949s. 46A
- Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988s. 10, s. 11, s. 12, s. 7, s. 8, s. 9
Subjects
Judgment
[2016] 11 S.C.R. 870
A C.B.I. BANK SECURITIES & FRAUD CELL
v.
RAMESH GELLI & ORS.
(Crl. MP Nos. 6416-6420 of 2016)
B In
(CriminalAppealNo.1077-1081 of2013)
MAY02,2016
[RANJAN GOGOi AND PRAFULLA C. PANT, JJ.]
c
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - s.13(2) rlw.
s.13(l){d) - Banking Regulation Act, 1949 - s.46A - Separate
Judgments of Hon 'ble Mr. Justice Ranjan Gogoi, and Hon 'hie Mr.
Justice Prafulla C. Pant reported in [2016] 1 SCR 762 - Para 25
of the Judgment of Hon 'ble Mr. Justice Prafulla C. Pant -
D Modification made in the said para.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Cr! MP Nos. 6416-
6420 of2016 in Criminal Appeal Nos. I 077-1081 of2013.
E From the Judgment and Order dated 13.07.2009 of the High Court
of Judicature at Mumbai in Criminal Revision Application No. 131 of
2007 with Criminal Writ Petition No. 2400 of2008 to 2403 of2008.
Tushar Mehta, ASG, Rana Mukherjee, Sr. Adv., Ms. Ranjana
Narayan, T. A. Khan, M.A. Meroria, Arvind Kumar Sharma, Advs. for
F the Appellant.
Mohan Parasaran, Sr. Adv., G. Umapathy, Rakesh K. Sharma,
S. Ramasubramanian, Ranjit B. Raut, Ms. Bina Gupta, Abay A. Jena,
Mis Khaitan & Co., Ad vs. for the Respondents.
G
The Order of the Court was delivered
ORDER
Jn paragraph 25 of the Judgment dated 23.02.2016 (by Mr. Prafulla
H
870
C.B.I. BANK SECURITIES & FRAUD CELL v. RAMESH GELLI 871
& ORS.
C. Pant, J.) instead of words "Section 46 of Banking Regulation Act, A
1949" the words "Section 46A of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949"
shall be substituted and in th~ last sentence of the paragraph instead of
"Section 7 to 13 of the P.C. Act, 1988", the words "Section 7 to 12 of the
P.C. Act, 1988", shall be substituted.
B
CRL.M.P. Nos. 6416-6420 of2016 are accordingly allowed.
Nidhi Jain Petitions allowed.
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.