CRM-M-32708 v. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & Anr.

Judgment

1. The instant petition has been filed under section 528 of the The instant petition has been filed under section 528 of the The instant petition has been filed under section 528 of the The instant petition has been filed under section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (earlier section 482 Cr.P.C.) with the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (earlier section 482 Cr.P.C.) with the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (earlier section 482 Cr.P.C.) with the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (earlier section 482 Cr.P.C.) with the 1), to the extent, prayer for quashing the order dated 30.05.2026 (Annexure P-1), to the extent, prayer for quashing the order dated 30.05.2026 (Annexure P prayer for quashing the order dated 30.05.2026 (Annexure P the petitioner has inter alia been directed to deposit the petitioner has Rs. 4.95 Crores in the form been directed to deposit Rs. 4.95 Crores in the form

7.5% of the alleged defaulted amount, while of an FDR, which is approximately 7.5% of the alleged defaulted amount, while 7.5% of the alleged defaulted amount, while of an FDR, which is approximately allowing the application for travelling abroad. Further prayer has been made to allowing the application for travelling abroad. Further prayer has been made to allowing the application for travelling abroad. Further prayer has been made to allowing the application for travelling abroad. Further prayer has been made to s daughter from 09.06.2026 to allow the petitioner to travel abroad with his daughter from 09.06.2026 to allow the petitioner to travel abroad with hi allow the petitioner to travel abroad with hi all the conditions imposed by the CBI 30.06.2026, subject to the compliance of all the conditions imposed by the CBI all the conditions imposed by the CBI 30.06.2026, subject to Court vide the aforementioned order, except the impugned condition. Court vide the aforementioned order, except the impugned condition. Court vide the aforementioned order, except the impugned condition.

2. CBI has filed the reply on Learned counsel for respondent No.1-CBI has filed the reply on Learned counsel for respondent No.1 Learned counsel for respondent No.1 e said respondent, which is taken on record. Registry is directed to behalf of the said respondent, which is taken on record. Registry is directed to e said respondent, which is taken on record. Registry is directed to e said respondent, which is taken on record. Registry is directed to CRM-M-32708 32708-2026 tag the same at the appropriate place. tag the same at the appropriate place. -2-

rief facts required to be noticed Shorn of unnecessary details, the brief facts required to be noticed Shorn of unnecessary details, the b Shorn of unnecessary details, the b with other for the adjudication of the instant petition are that the petitioner alongwith other for the adjudication of the instant petition are that the petitioner for the adjudication of the instant petition are that the petitioner stands implicated in FIR No.RC0512022S0007 dated 31.10.2022, co-accused stands implicated in FIR No.RC0512022S0007 dated 31.10.2022, stands implicated in FIR No.RC0512022S0007 dated 31.10.2022, stands implicated in FIR No.RC0512022S0007 dated 31.10.2022, registered at police station CBI, SCB/CHD, registered registered at police station CBI, under sections 420 read registered under sections 420 read and 13(2) read with section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention with section 120-B IPC, and 13(2) read with section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention and 13(2) read with section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention with section 120 t, 1988 (subsequently deleted). of Corruption Act, 1988 (subsequently deleted). of Corruption Ac

4. accused It transpires that the petitioner was the director of the co-accused It transpires that the petitioner was the director of the co It transpires that the petitioner was the director of the co ), which had obtained a company M/s Goldline Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. (‘GIPL’), which had obtained a company M/s Goldline Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. (‘GIPL company M/s Goldline Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. (‘GIPL subsequently term loan of Rs.25 crores from respondent No.2-Bank, which was subsequently term loan of Rs.25 crores from respondent No.2 term loan of Rs.25 crores from respondent No.2 reduced to Rs.19 crores, for construction of an affordable residential project. As reduced to Rs.19 crores, for construction of an affordable residential project. As reduced to Rs.19 crores, for construction of an affordable residential project. As reduced to Rs.19 crores, for construction of an affordable residential project. As per the allegations, the term loan was sanctioned on 20.12.2014, and an amount per the allegations, the term loan was sanctioned on 20.12.2014, and an amount per the allegations, the term loan was sanctioned on 20.12.2014, and an amount per the allegations, the term loan was sanctioned on 20.12.2014, and an amount of Rs.18.97 crores was disbursed by the Bank between 28.02.2015 to 25.06.2015. of Rs.18.97 crores was disbursed by the Bank between 28.02.2015 to 25.06.2015. of Rs.18.97 crores was disbursed by the Bank between 28.02.2015 to 25.06.2015. of Rs.18.97 crores was disbursed by the Bank between 28.02.2015 to 25.06.2015. on failure of the company to repay the loan, the same was declared as a Non- Upon failure of the company to repay the loan, the same was declared as a Non on failure of the company to repay the loan, the same was declared as a Non on failure of the company to repay the loan, the same was declared as a Non ’ on 16.01.2021, by the Performing Asset (‘NPA’) on 29.05.2018 and as ‘fraud’ on 16.01.2021, by the Performing Asset (‘NPA’) on 29.05.2018 and as ‘ Performing Asset (‘NPA’) on 29.05.2018 and as ‘ Bank.

5. alleged that the amount of loan was not used for the It is alleged that the amount of loan was not used for the alleged that the amount of loan was not used for the It is and rather the funds were siphoned off and transferred construction of the project and rather the funds were siphoned off and transferred and rather the funds were siphoned off and transferred construction of the project to sister concerns. Further allegations are that corporate guarantor to sister concerns. Further allegation mortgagor that corporate guarantor/mortgagor Goldsouk International Limited (‘AGIL’) had pledged 5 namely M/s Aerens Goldsouk International Limited (‘AGIL’) had pledged 5 Goldsouk International Limited (‘AGIL’) had pledged 5 namely M/s Aerens e same to be unencumbered. shops as additional security/collateral claiming the same to be unencumbered. shops as additional security/collateral claiming th shops as additional security/collateral claiming th However, it was subsequently discovered that an agreement to sell qua the said However, it was subsequently discovered that an agreement to sell qua the said However, it was subsequently discovered that an agreement to sell qua the said However, it was subsequently discovered that an agreement to sell qua the said shops had already been executed by the corporate guarantor/mortgagor in favour shops had already been executed by the corporate guarantor/mortgagor in favour shops had already been executed by the corporate guarantor/mortgagor in favour shops had already been executed by the corporate guarantor/mortgagor in favour Usha of one Mrs. Usha Gupta. A civil suit had already been initiated by Mrs. Usha of one Mrs. Usha Gupta. A civil suit had already been initiated by Mrs. of one Mrs. Usha Gupta. A civil suit had already been initiated by Mrs. Gupta for specific performance of the agreement to sell in the year 2013, Gupta for specific performance of the agreement to sell in the year 2013, Gupta for specific performance of the agreement to sell in the year 2013, Gupta for specific performance of the agreement to sell in the year 2013, CRM-M-32708 32708-2026 -3- however the said factum was concealed, when the term loan was sanctioned in however the said factum was concealed, when the term loan was sanctioned in however the said factum was concealed, when the term loan was sanctioned in however the said factum was concealed, when the term loan was sanctioned in ne of the prerequisites for sanctioning of the term loan was a favour of GIPL. One of the prerequisites for sanctioning of the term loan was a ne of the prerequisites for sanctioning of the term loan was a favour of GIPL. IPL should raise an amount of Rs.6 crores for the construction of condition that GIPL should raise an amount of Rs.6 crores for the construction of IPL should raise an amount of Rs.6 crores for the construction of condition that G the project, before disbursal of funds, however no such amount was raised. the project, before disbursal of funds, however no such amount was raised. the project, before disbursal of funds, however no such amount was raised.

6. the petitioner has approached this Court for It further transpires that the petitioner has approached this Court for the petitioner has approached this Court for It further transpires that 2025, in quashing of the FIR and subsequent proceedings in CRM-M-10347-2025, in quashing of the FIR and subsequent proceedi quashing of the FIR and subsequent proceedi pending which notice regarding stay has been issued and the matter is admittedly pending which notice regarding stay has been issued and the matter is which notice regarding stay has been issued and the matter is for 20.07.2026. for 20.07.2026.

7. for the petitioner to approach this Court by The immediate cause for the petitioner to approach this Court by for the petitioner to approach this Court by The way of the instant petition the instant petition, arises from the order dated 30.0 Annexure P- arises from the order dated 30.05.2026 (Annexure P application passed by the Special Duty Magistrate, CBI Court, wherein the application passed by the Special Duty Magistrate, CBI Court, wherein 1) passed by the Special Duty Magistrate, CBI Court, wherein No.IA/42/2026 filed by him, seeking permission to go abroad and visit No.IA/42/2026 filed by various , seeking permission to go abroad and visit various has been allowed, subject countries including Switzerland, France, UK and Italy, has been allowed, subject countries including Switzerland, France, UK and Italy, countries including Switzerland, France, UK and Italy, including the impugned condition, which to the fulfillment of certain conditions, including the impugned condition, which including the impugned condition, which to the fulfillment of are extracted hereunder for the facility of reference:- are extracted hereunder for the facility of reference are extracted hereunder for the facility of reference CRM-M-32708 32708-2026 -4-

8. The purported reason for the petitioner’s v The purported reason for isit to foreign countries, the petitioner’s visit to foreign countries, is to explore the opportunities and make arrangements for the higher studies of is to explore the opportunities and make arrangements for the higher studies of is to explore the opportunities and make arrangements for the higher studies of is to explore the opportunities and make arrangements for the higher studies of Court would reveal that the daughter. Perusal of the order passed by the CBI Court would reveal that the daughter. Perusal of the order passed by the his daughter. Perusal of the order passed by the impugned condition of the deposit of Rs.4.95 crores in the form of FDR has impugned condition of the deposit of Rs.4.95 crores in the form of FDR has impugned condition of the deposit of Rs.4.95 crores in the form of FDR has impugned condition of the deposit of Rs.4.95 crores in the form of FDR has been imposed on the ground that right to travel abroad is not absolute and is been imposed on the ground that right to travel abroad is not absolute and is been imposed on the ground that right to travel abroad is not absolute and is been imposed on the ground that right to travel abroad is not absolute and is law. subject to reasonable restrictions that may be imposed in accordance with law. subject to reasonable restrictions that may be imposed in accordance with subject to reasonable restrictions that may be imposed in accordance with The past travel history was specifically noticed and it was held that a consistent The past travel history was specifically noticed and it was held that a consistent The past travel history was specifically noticed and it was held that a consistent The past travel history was specifically noticed and it was held that a consistent pattern of frequent and repeated international travel would indicate that the pattern of frequent and repeated international travel would indicate that the pattern of frequent and repeated international travel would indicate that the pattern of frequent and repeated international travel would indicate that the CRM-M-32708 32708-2026 -5- petitioner has been enjoying a petitioner has been enjoying a petitioner has been enjoying a petitioner has been enjoying a lifestyle lifestyle lifestyle lifestyle involving substantial financial involving substantial financial involving substantial financial involving substantial financial expenditure on such international travel and luxurious stay expenditure on su . Reliance was placed ch international travel and luxurious stay. Reliance was placed dated 12.09.2024 passed by a Division Bench of this Court in upon an order dated 12.09.2024 passed by a Division Bench of this Court in dated 12.09.2024 passed by a Division Bench of this Court in upon an order CM-14725-CWP CWP-2024 in CWP-5091-2024, ‘ Surender Gupta vs. UOI and , ‘Surender Gupta vs. UOI and others’, while imposing the impugned condition. while imposing the impugned condition.

9. lthough various submissions have been advanced, however, Although various submissions have been advanced, however lthough various submissions have been advanced, however A learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has primarily assailed the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has primarily assailed the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has primarily assailed the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has primarily assailed the condition imposition of the impugned condition on the ground that such a pre-condition imposition of the impugned condition on the ground that such a pre imposition of the impugned condition on the ground that such a pre upon the fundamental right of the the fundamental right of the petitioner to travel abroad, tantamount to the petitioner to travel abroad, tantamounts to the contrary to the unproven allegation being established, which is ex facie contrary to the unproven allegation being established, which is unproven allegation being established, which is presumption of innocence enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. presumption of innocence enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. presumption of innocence enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. presumption of innocence enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Submission is that the figure of Rs.66.48 crores is t Submission is that he Bank’s unilateral claim as figure of Rs.66.48 crores is the Bank’s unilateral claim as on 31.10.2025 and has not been adjudicated or established by any Court. on 31.10.2025 and has not been adjudicated or established by any Court on 31.10.2025 and has not been adjudicated or established by any Court on 31.10.2025 and has not been adjudicated or established by any Court reating such disputed, contested, and unproved allegation as the basis of Treating such disputed, contested, and unproved allegation as the basis of reating such disputed, contested, and unproved allegation as the basis of reating such disputed, contested, and unproved allegation as the basis of computation of a mandatory financial deposit, is patently illegal. The attention of computation of a mandatory financial deposit, is patently illegal. The attention computation of a mandatory financial deposit, is patently illegal. The attention computation of a mandatory financial deposit, is patently illegal. The attention , to contend that the the Court is drawn to a chart at page 11 of the paper book, to contend that the the Court is drawn to a chart at page 11 of the the Court is drawn to a chart at page 11 of the , as per the own assessment of the Bank was valuation of the primary security, as per the own assessment of the Bank was , as per the own assessment of the Bank was valuation of the more than Rs.37 crores, i.e. almost the double of the amount of the term loan. more than Rs.37 crores, i.e. almost the double of the amount of the term loan. more than Rs.37 crores, i.e. almost the double of the amount of the term loan.

10. It is argued that undisputedly the proceedings under the Insolvency It is argued that undisputedly the proceedings under the Insolvency It is argued that undisputedly the proceedings under the Insolvency It is argued that undisputedly the proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code are pending before the National Company Law Tribunal and Bankruptcy Code are pending before the National Company Law Tribunal and Bankruptcy Code are pending before the National Company Law Tribunal and Bankruptcy Code are pending before the National Company Law Tribunal the Resolution and all secured assets, projects have been taken over by the Resolution and all secured assets, projects have been taken over and all secured assets, projects have been taken over lier orders dated 20.04.2024, Professionals. Reference is made to the earlier orders dated 20.04.2024 Professionals. Reference is made to the ear Professionals. Reference is made to the ear ) to and 15.05.2025 passed by the CBI Court, (Annexure P-11 (colly.) to and 15.05.2025 passed by the CBI Court 02.08.2024 and 15.05.2025 passed by the CBI Court demonstrate that the petitioner had that the petitioner had on earlier occasions also travelled abroad due on earlier occasions also travelled abroad due to medical reasons and for educational visit alongwith his to medical reasons educational visit alongwith his minor daughter, and CRM-M-32708 32708-2026 -6- onerous condition was had returned back each time, despite the fact that no such onerous condition was had returned back each time, despite the fact that had returned back each time, despite the fact that ever imposed. It is . It is therefore submitted that the petitioner is not a that the petitioner is not a flight ri flight risk, on account of the fact that he has deep roots in the society and his especially on account of the fact that he has deep roots in the society and his on account of the fact that he has deep roots in the society and his on account of the fact that he has deep roots in the society and his and aged parents reside in the country. It is further pointed out that the family and aged parents reside in the country. It is further pointed out that the and aged parents reside in the country. It is further pointed out that the and aged parents reside in the country. It is further pointed out that the accused Amit Gupta, learned CBI court has recently granted permission to the co-accused Amit Gupta, learned CBI court has recently granted permission to the co learned CBI court has recently granted permission to the co travel abroad, without imposing any such condition travel abroad, without . It is argued that directing imposing any such condition. It is argued that directing the deposit of such a huge amount as a pre the deposit of such a huge amount condition to travel, renders the as a pre-condition to travel, renders the permission as illusory and is punitive in nature. Reliance is placed upon the permission as illusory and is punitive in nature. Reliance is placed upon the permission as illusory and is punitive in nature. Reliance is placed upon the permission as illusory and is punitive in nature. Reliance is placed upon the judgments of the Supreme Court in Dilip Sin judgments of the Supreme Court in gh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh lip Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh 2 SCC 779, Sumit Mehta Vs. State of N.C.T. of Delhi and antoher, (2021) 2 SCC 779, Sumit Mehta Vs. State of N.C.T. of Delhi 2 SCC 779, Sumit Mehta Vs. State of N.C.T. of Delhi and antoher, (2021)