N.V. Ramana JUDGMENT
Ranjan Gogoi, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. The Appellant, Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) ACB, Mumbai seeks to challenge an order dated 28.10.2005 passed by the High Court of Bombay quashing the criminal proceedings against the Respondents Narendra Lal Jain, Jayantilal L. Shah and Ramanlal Lalchand Jain. The aforesaid Respondents had moved the High Court under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "Code of Criminal Procedure") challenging the orders passed by the learned Trial Court refusing to discharge them and also questioning the continuance of the criminal proceedings registered against them. of the three accused, Jayantilal L. Shah, the court is informed, has died during the pendency of the present appeal truncating the scope thereof to an adjudication of the correctness of the decision of the High Court in so far as accused Narendra Lal Jain and Ramanlal Lalchand Jain are concerned.
3. On the basis of two FIRs dated 22.03.1993, R.C. No. 21(A) of 1993 and R.C. No. 22 (A) of 1993 were registered against the accused-Respondents and several officers of the Bank of Maharashtra. The offences alleged were duly investigated and separate chargesheets in the two cases were filed on the basis whereof Special Case No. 15 of 1995 and Special Case No. 20 of 1995 were registered in the Court of the Special Judge, Mumbai. In the chargesheet filed, offences under Sections 120B/420 Indian Penal Code and Sections 5(2) read with Section 5(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 corresponding to Sections 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short "PC Act") were alleged against the accused persons. In so far as the present accused-Respondents are concerned the gravamen of the charge is that they had conspired with the bank officials and had projected inflated figures of the creditworthiness of the companies represented by them and in this manner had secured more advances/loans from the bank than they were entitled to.
4. While the criminal cases were being investigated the bank had instituted suits for recovery of the amounts claimed to be due from the Respondents. The said suits were disposed of in terms of consent decrees dated 23.04.2001. Illustratively, the relevant clause of the agreement on the basis of which the consent decrees were passed reads as follows:
10. Agreed and declared that dispute between the parties hereto were purely and simply of civil nature and on payment mentioned as aforesaid made by the........