Sashidhar Jagdishan v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.

Lilavati Kirtilal Mehta Medical Trust (Represented by Mr. Prashant Mehta Through its Power of Attorney Holder Mr. Dinanath Sawant) An individual aged about 64 years, having office at Diamond House, 9 Vatcha Gandhi Road, Gamdevi, Mumbai – 400 007. … Applicant … Petitioner .… Respondents WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.3227 OF 2025 6 Bhogale wp-3205-2025.odt WITH INTERIM APPLICATION (ST) NO.21717 OF 2025 IN CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.3227 OF 2025 … Petitioner Lilavati Kirtilal Mehta Medical Trust Through Mr. Prashant Mehta Age – 52 (Permanent Trustee for Life) Having registered office at A791, Bandra Reclamation, Bandra West, Mumbai – 400 050 Versus

Union of India Through the Secretary Department of Personnel & Training (DOPT) in the Ministry of Personnel, Pension & Grievances AND Central Vigilance Commission (CVC)

Central Bureau of Investigation Through its Joint Director Central Bureau of Investigation Bandra, Mumbai

State of Maharashtra Through its Secretary Having office at Mantralaya, Mumbai

4. Bandra Police Station Through Senior Police Inspector Hill Road, Bandra West, Mumbai – 400 050

Sashidhar Jagdishan HDFC Bank House, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai – 400 013 7 Bhogale wp-3205-2025.odt

Chetan Mehta R/at: The Imperial – North Tower, Apartment 3205, Tardeo, Mumbai – 400034

Rashmi Mehta Indian Adult, R/at: Usha Kiran, Flat No.24, 12th Floor, 15, Carmichael Road, Mumbai – 400 026.

Mr. Bhavin Mehta Indian Adult, R/at: Usha Kiran, Flat No.24, 12th Floor, 15, Carmichael Road, Mumbai – 400 026.

Mr. Niket Mehta Indian Adult, R/at: Maker Tower ‘L’, 9th Floor, Flat No.91, Cuffe Parade, Colaba, Mumbai – 400 005.

Mr. Nimesh Sheth Indian Adult, R/at: Sweekar Bldg., 1st Floor, V.P. Road, Vile Parle (West), Mumbai – 400 056.

Mr. Ayushman Mehta Indian Adult, R/at: The Imperial – North Tower Apartment 3205, Tardeo, Mumbai – 400 034. .… Respondents WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.3313 OF 2025 Lilavati Kirtilal Mehta Medical Trust Through Mr. Prashant Mehta 8 Bhogale wp-3205-2025.odt … Petitioner (Permanent Trustee for Life) Having registered office at A791, Bandra Reclamation, Bandra West, Mumbai – 400 050 Versus

1. Union of India Through the Secretary Department of Personnel & Training (DOPT) in the Ministry of Personnel, Pension & Grievances AND Central Vigilance Commission (CVC)

2. Central Bureau of Investigation Through its Joint Director Central Bureau of Investigation Bandra, Mumbai

3. State of Maharashtra Through its Secretary Having office at Mantralaya, Mumbai

4. Bandra Police Station Through Senior Police Inspector Hill Road, Bandra West, Mumbai – 400 050 5. Venkattu Srinivasan Director of Pheonix ARC, 3rd Floor, Wallace Towers, Vile Parle East, Mumbai, Maharashtra - 400057

6. Chetan Mehta R/at: The Imperial – North Tower, Apartment 3205, Tardeo, Mumbai – 400034

7. Rashmi Mehta Indian Adult, 9 Bhogale wp-3205-2025.odt R/at: Usha Kiran, Flat No.24, 12th Floor, 15, Carmichael Road, Mumbai – 400 026.

8. Bhavin Mehta Indian Adult, R/at: Usha Kiran, Flat No.24, 12th Floor, 15, Carmichael Road, Mumbai – 400 026.

9. Niket Mehta Indian Adult, R/at: Maker Tower ‘L’, 9th Floor, Flat No.91, Cuffe Parade, Colaba, Mumbai – 400 005.

10. Nimesh Sheth Indian Adult, R/at: Sweekar Bldg., 1st Floor, V.P. Road, Vile Parle (West), Mumbai – 400 056.

11. Ayushman Mehta Indian Adult, R/at: The Imperial – North Tower Apartment 3205, Tardeo, Mumbai – 400 034.

Mr. VSN Murthy, The Then Recovery Officer, DRT-II Mumbai.

Mr. Keki Elavia Being the Board of Directors, Phoenix Arc having address at Phoenix ARC Pvt. Ltd. 158, 5th Floor, Dani Corporate Park, CST Road, MMRDA Area, Kalina, Santacruz (E), Mumbai – 400 098

Mr. Chandan Bhattacharya Being the Board of Directors, 10 Bhogale wp-3205-2025.odt Phoenix Arc having address at Phoenix ARC Pvt. Ltd. 158, 5th Floor, Dani Corporate Park, CST Road, MMRDA Area, Kalina, Santacruz (E), Mumbai – 400 098 **** .… Respondents Mr. Amit Desai, Senior Advocate, a/w Mr. D.P. Singh, Senior Advocate, Mr. Sandeep Singhi, Mr. Himanshu Sinha, Ms. Chitra Rentala, Mr. Gopal Krishna Shenoy, Ms. Kriti Srivastava, Mr. Ritesh Desai, Mr. Parikshith K, Ms. Shravani Maddirala, Mr. Utkarsh Mishra, i/b Trilegal for the petitioners in WP/ 3205/2025. Mr. Ravi Kadam, Senior Advocate a/w Mr. Himanshu Sinha, Ms. Chitra Rentala, Ms. Kriti Srivastava, Mr.Parikshith K., Ms. Shravani Maddirala and Mr. Utkarsh Mishra, i/b Trilegal for the petitioners in WP/3215/2025. Mr. Charles De Souza a/w Ms. Manaswi Agrawal, Mr. Shantanu Ray, Ms. Pragati Gothi and Ms. Salomi Kalwade i/b Meraki Chambers for the petitioners in WP/3216/2025.

1. Since common issues are involved in respect of the same FIR and by and large similar allegations are levelled against the petitioners, all these writ petitions are disposed of by a common judgment.

2. Writ Petition Nos.3205 of 2025, 3215 of 2025, 3216 of 2025, 3217 of 2025 were reserved for judgment on 08/10/2025. Since according to learned counsel, the decision in the present set of writ petitions would have a bearing on Criminal Writ Petition Nos.3227 of 2025 and 3313 of 2025, a request was made for hearing Criminal Writ Petition Nos.3227 of 2025 and 3313 of 2025 for transfer of the investigation to the Central Bureau of Investigation (“CBI”, for short) as well along with this group. Accordingly, we have heard Criminal Writ Petition Nos.3227 of 2025 and 3313 of 2025 and closed the same for orders on 29/01/2026. 13 Bhogale wp-3205-2025.odt

3. The petitioner-Sashidhar Jagdishan by this writ petition (Writ Petition No.3205 of 2025) under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Section 482 of the erstwhile Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973) seeks quashing of (i) FIR No.0818 of 2025 registered at Bandra Police Station under Sections 406, 409 and 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (“IPC”, for short), and (ii) the order dated 29/05/2025 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, 12th Court, Bandra in S.W. No.63 of 2025 directing registration of the said FIR. The petitioner is the Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer of HDFC Bank Limited. There is another FIR bearing No.0819 of 2025 levelling similar allegations against the accused, of which quashment is sought.

4. The long and short of the petitioner’s case is that the criminal proceedings initiated by the respondent No.3-complainant constitute a gross abuse of process of law and have been initiated with malafide intent to harass him and tarnish the reputation of HDFC Bank. Mr. Amit Desai, learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner submitted that the FIR is a fallout of long-standing 14 Bhogale wp-3205-2025.odt recovery and enforcement proceedings initiated by HDFC Bank against the complainant’s family for default in repayment of substantial dues exceeding Rs.65 crores.

5. The allegation in the complaint made by the respondent No.3-Mr. Prashant Mehta (“complainant” for short) is that in 2006, Mr. Chetan Mehta (original accused No.1) and others fraudulently and illegally gained control over the Lilavati Kirtilal Mehta Medical Trust (“the Trust”, for short) and in collusion with other accused and with corrupt motive, used the Trust’s funds for their own gains and for personal litigation.

6. Pursuant to the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court dated 18/08/2023 and the consequent order dated 14/12/2023 passed by the Assistant Charity Commissioner under the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950, new trustees, the complainant being one of them, were appointed thereby removing the accused No.1 and other trustees from the Trust. After gaining control over the Trust, the complainant discovered that records pertaining to financial misconduct in the Trust had been destroyed by the accused persons before leaving the Trust. However, certain documents, including a photocopy of the cash register, indicated 15 Bhogale wp-3205-2025.odt cash transactions clearly demonstrating misuse of Trust funds.

7. It is alleged that in 1969, Mr. Kishore Mehta (complainant’s father), Mr. Vijay Mehta and Mr. Prabodh Mehta (complainant’s uncles) established a partnership named Beautiful Diamond Limited, a diamond trading company. The company availed a loan from Global Trust Bank, which merged into Oriental Bank, then into United Bank of India, and eventually into Punjab National Bank. During the course of recovery of the unpaid dues, Punjab National Bank transferred the loans, rights, shares, benefits and related financial agreements to Phoenix ARC Private Limited (petitioner in Writ Petition No.3215 of 2025, accused No.9 in the FIR) by an Assignment Deed on 30/09/2013. Subsequently, Phoenix ARC Private Limited, under the supervision of accused Nos.10 and 11, communicated with the borrower company for negotiations.

8. That consent terms were filed before the Debts Recovery Tribunal (“DRT”, for short) on 01/10/2013, pursuant to which 14 security cheques were handed over by Splendor Gems Limited to accused No.9, Keki Elavia, Director of Phoenix ARC Private Limited. A mortgage deed was purportedly executed against the 16 Bhogale wp-3205-2025.odt immovable properties listed in Table 1 of the consent terms of the borrower company. After issuance of recovery certificates, the mortgaged assets were auctioned and sold by the borrower company through recovery officers. Approximately, property worth Rs.81 crores was sold, in which accused No.8/Phoenix ARC Private Limited was entitled to a significant share of the sale proceeds. The loans availed by the borrower company were insured by Export Credit Guarantee Corporation of India (“ECGCI”, for short), entitling Oriental Bank to 90% insurance amount benefit in case of default of the loan, which amount, the complainant claims, is likely to have been received by the bank.

9. The complainant alleges that the recovery process was executed fraudulently by Phoenix ARC Private Limited by concealing material facts, with the sole intention to mentally harass late Mr. Kishore Mehta and Mr. Rajesh Mehta and the pressure created by the controversy, led to causing the death of Mr. Kishore Mehta. It is alleged that HDFC Bank and Phoenix ARC initiated fraudulent litigation despite the debt being repaid.

10. The complainant has placed heavy reliance on the photocopy of a cash diary which according to him shows the 17 Bhogale wp-3205-2025.odt entries regarding large payments made by accused Nos.1 to 7 (erstwhile trustees) to Senior Phoenix ARC Officials (accused Nos.8 to 11) and the petitioner as well as other accused persons.

11. Thereafter, on 17/04/2025, Lilavati Kirtilal Mehta Medical Trust (through respondent No.3) moved Application No. C.C. 63/SW/2025 under Section 175(3) of the BNSS, seeking direction for registration of an FIR on the basis of the same allegations. The Bandra Police, by its report dated 27/05/2025, pointed out that three FIRs were already pending on identical issues - (i) FIR No. 972/2024 (Sect. 406, 420, 34 IPC), (ii) FIR No. 1916/2024 (Sect. 406, 409, 420, 465, 467, 34 IPC), and (iii) FIR No. 375/2025 (Sect. 403, 406, 409, 420, 465, 467, 471, 474 IPC) — and hence no fresh FIR was warranted.

12. The learned JMFC passed the impugned orders dated 29/05/2025, directing registration of FIR’s under Sections 406, 409 and 420 read with Section 34 of IPC against the petitioners and certain former trustees of the Lilavati Trust. Pursuant thereto, FIR No.0818 of 2025 and FIR No.0819 of 2025 was registered on 31/05/2025 at Bandra Police Station. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE LEARNED SENIOR ADVOCATES FOR THE PETITIONERS :- 18 Bhogale wp-3205-2025.odt

13. Mr. Amit Desai, Mr. Ravi Kadam, learned Senior Advocates, Mr. Charles De Souza, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submit that the impugned order dated 29/05/2025, passed by the learned JMFC, Bandra, in C.C. No.63/SW/2025, directing registration of an FIR against the petitioner and officials of HDFC Bank under Sections 406, 409 and 420 read with Section 34 of the IPC, is patently erroneous, contrary to law, and unsustainable.

14. Learned Senior Advocates submit that the impugned order amounts to a gross abuse of the criminal process, being founded on purely civil and recovery proceedings that have already attained finality through orders of the DRT and this Court. The allegations, even if taken at face value, do not disclose any entrustment or dishonest inducement which are the essential ingredients of Sections 406, 409 or 420 of IPC.

It is further contended that Section 175(3) of the BNSS confers no mechanical right to seek registration of an FIR where the allegations have already been examined and rejected. The Magistrate failed to appreciate the binding effect of prior judicial orders and the bar against multiplicity of proceedings on identical 19 Bhogale wp-3205-2025.odt facts.

The petitioner relies upon the settled principle laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in State of Haryana vs. Bhajan Lal1, and Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. vs. Mohd. Sharaful Haq2, to contend that where the allegations are civil in nature and manifestly attended with malafides, the High Court is empowered to quash the proceedings under Article 226 or Section 482 to prevent abuse of process.

It is thus submitted that the impugned order dated 29/05/2025 and the consequent FIR’s deserve to be quashed and set aside, being arbitrary, repetitive, and contrary to settled law.

The decisions relied upon by the learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner are as under :- (1) Priyanka Srivastava vs. State of U.P.3 (2) Anil Kumar vs. M.K. Aiyappa4 (3) Pepsi Foods Ltd. vs. Special Judicial Magistrate5 (4) State of Haryana vs. Bhajan Lal (supra) (5) Sharaful Haque (supra) Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. vs. Mohd. 1 2 3 4 5