High Court Rejects Petition to Quash FIR Against Ex-Bank Official in Mumbai for 10L Fraud

Mumbai: The Bombay High Court has refused to quash an FIR against a former credit manager, who, along with two others, allegedly cheated a housing finance company into disbursing over Rs 10 lakh for the purchase of a room in an Andheri (E) chawl. "We find that the FIR clearly discloses the petitioner's involvement in the loan transaction. At this stage, we cannot embark upon an inquiry as to the reliability or genuineness or otherwise of the allegations made in the FIR/complaint," said Justices Ravindra Ghuge and Gautam Ankhad on Wednesday, dismissing Pravin Sawnt's petition.

In December 2017, Sawnt resigned from Aspire Home Finance Co Ltd, now Motilal Oswal Home Finance Ltd, for better prospects. In 2018, Dadar police registered a non-cognisable complaint against the company for his unpaid salary dues. In 2019, on the complaint by the cluster legal manager of Virar (E) branch, the Virar police registered an FIR for cheating against Sawnt and two branch managers.

The FIR stated that Sawnt was stationed at the head office. His role was to examine the credit record of borrowers after initial recommendations from branch and cluster managers. In 2015, a loan of Rs 10.3 lakh was disbursed to a couple. After they defaulted, officials visited the property and found it to be a chawl or slum. There is no provision for granting a housing loan for the purchase of a room in a chawl or slum. The couple did not reside there and had sold the room. They had not executed a mortgage deed to secure the loan. An internal inquiry revealed that Sawnt, as credit head, and two branch managers abused their official position to sanction the loan.

The judges said the nature of allegations and whether they prima facie disclose the commission of a cognizable offense or not is required to be considered. "It is only in exceptional cases where allegations are so absurd and do not disclose an offense that courts can interfere," they added. The credit appraisal memo recorded Sawnt's role "as one of the persons involved in the loan approval process." The judges did not accept his advocate's submission that the process is subject to a legal and technical report of the property, which was the work of another department. "This is a question of fact and a matter of investigation. All this will have to be adjudicated by the trial court. Equally, that the petitioner was not a beneficiary of any amount is of no consequence at this stage," they said. They vacated a February 2020 protection order.