The Supreme Court granted bail to a Chartered Accountant who was arrested by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in connection with a probe into the Rs 318 crore Global Depository Receipts (GDRs) fraud.
The ED apprehended that the appellant CA is a flight risk and may go out of the country if released on bail must be taken care of by imposing appropriate conditions (for bail). The apex court enlarged Sanjay Raghunath Aggarwal on bail subject to such terms and conditions as may be imposed by the Metropolitan Sessions Judge-cum-Special Court under PMLA, Nampally, Hyderabad.
A Two judge bench comprising Justices V Ramasubramanian and Pankaj Mithal directed Aggarwal to surrender his passport before the special court and regularly appear before it without fails whenever the prosecution complaint filed by ED is posted for hearing.
The case against Aggarwal was lodged based on the complaint of the Managing Director of Farmax India Limited, a manufacturing and retailing company engaged in fast-moving consumer goods. It was stated that Farmax had availed the services of the accused in raising Global Depository Receipts (GDRs) to the tune of Rs 318 crore.
A global depository receipt (GDR) is a negotiable financial instrument issued by a depositary bank. It represents shares in a foreign company and trades on the local stock exchanges in investors’ countries. GDRs make it possible for a company (the issuer) to access investors in capital markets beyond the borders of its own country. It is a negotiable certificate issued by a bank which represents shares in a foreign company traded on a local stock exchange.
It was stated that though the accused raised Rs 318 crore, he transferred to Farmax only a sum of Rs 2.20 crore. After inquiring with the bank concerned, the complainant company came to know that the accused had misappropriated the balance amount by forging signatures with the help of the pledged documents.
A bench of Justices V Ramasubramanian and Pankaj Mithal observed that no final report has been filed in the FIR and continued incarceration of the appellant may not be justified. However, the Court granted bail to the applicant.
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
