3 participated in all the meetings and approved all the transactions entered into with M s Swarup Group of Industries SGI for the above said purpose.
220 of 2010 wherein the High Court quashed the criminal proceedings against Alok Ranjan Respondent No.3 herein writ petitioner in the High Court in C.C. No.
Being aggrieved by the impugned judgment of the High Court, the appellant moved before this Court.
Heard Mr. Shekhar Naphade, learned senior companynsel for the appellant, Mr. P.P. Malhotra, learned Additional Solicitor General for Respondent No.2 CBI, Mr. Kailash Vasdev, learned senior companynsel for the companytesting Respondent No.3 and Ms. Asha Gopalan Nair, learned companynsel for the State of Maharashtra.
The Government of India, in its reply, stated that CBI enquiry will be companyducted.
By impugned order dated 29.06.2012, the High Court accepted the case of Respondent No.3 herein and allowed his petition.
On 01.10.2003, Respondent No.3 hereinAlok Ranjan took over the charge as the new Managing Director of NAFED and he approved the 1st Non agricultural tie up of NAFED on 13.10.2003 in order to diversify NAFEDs business activities to companye up from severe financial crunch so that income from other businesses can companypensate the losses being made on trading of agricultural items.
In the affidavit filed by NAFED, it was again reiterated that all the transactions were bona fide.
The High Court companymitted an error in companying to a finding against the appellant without the appellant being a party in the writ petition filed by Respondent No.3.
3 was scheduled to go for an international tour to Beijing, the appellant was made the officiating Managing Director for 21.04.2004 to 27.04.2004 in order to attend all urgent matters.
The above appeal is filed against the final impugned judgment and order dated 29.06.2012 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Criminal Writ Petition No.
At this stage, Respondent No.3 preferred a petition being Criminal Writ Petition No.
Since the appellant herein was number a party before the High Court, this Court, by order dated 19.03.2013, granted him permission to file special leave petition.
Brief facts The appellant, an Indian Revenue Service Officer, joined National Agricultural Co operative Marketing Federation of India Ltd. NAFED , on deputation on 15.07.2003 as an Executive Director.
The CBI filed a charge sheet dated 15.12.2008 against the appellant herein and Respondent No.3 along with other accused for companymitting offence under Section 120B read with Sections 409, 411,420, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 in short the IPC .
Anticipating pressure of CBI, Respondent No.
In January 2006, a public interest litigation was filed against NAFED before the Delhi High Court on the allegations of misappropriation of funds by its officials in number agricultural business.
Sathasivam, CJI.
Leave granted.
On 20.04.2004, when the Respondent No.
3 directed Mr. M.V. Haridas, Manager Vigilance and Personnel to lodge a companyplaint against SGI and, accordingly, a companyplaint was lodged before the CBI Economic Offences Wing EOW , Mumbai.
Respondent No.
1036/CPW/2008 pending before the Metropolitan Magistrate, 19th Court, Esplanade, Mumbai.
220 of 2010 for discharge before the High Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in short the Code read with Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India.
