Supreme Court Advocates for Childcare and Feeding Rooms in Public Spaces

Image
Supreme Court Advocates for Childcare and Feeding Rooms in Public Spaces The Supreme Court of India has suggested that the Union Government develop a comprehensive policy addressing the construction of feeding rooms and childcare facilities  in public places. This move aims to ensure that nursing mothers and their children can access basic amenities in a dignified and private manner, reinforcing their fundamental rights under the Indian Constitution. SC Encourages Policy Formulation A bench comprising Justice BV Nagarathna  and Justice N Kotiswar Singh  highlighted the absence of a structured framework to address this pressing issue. The court advised the Centre to propose a policy that could then be implemented across the states, scheduling the next hearing for December 10, 2024.   The apex court emphasized that before issuing formal directions, it was crucial to understand the Centre’s perspective on implementing the petitioner’s demand for childcare and feedi...
Post a Comment

Delhi High Court Grants Bail to Former Bank Manager Accused of Defrauding Woman of ₹13 Crores

Delhi High Court Grants Bail to Former Bank Manager 

Accused of Defrauding Woman of ₹13 Crores 


The Delhi High Court has granted bail to Varun Vashista, a former bank manager accused of embezzling over ₹13 crores from a customer’s account while working at ICICI Bank's Vikas Puri branch. The bail was approved by Justice Amit Mahajan on November 12, 2024, after considering the evidence and facts of the case.  


Details of the Case

The allegations against Vashista stem from his role as a branch manager. The complainant and her husband had entrusted him with managing their investments, amounting to ₹13.5 crores, between 2019 and 2023.  


The complainant discovered in January 2024 that nearly ₹12 crores had been **siphoned off** from her account. Key allegations include:  

- Creation of Fake Fixed Deposits: The accused reportedly created fraudulent fixed deposit accounts in the complainant’s name.  

- Misappropriation of Funds: Funds were transferred through banking channels, and significant amounts were withdrawn using the complainant’s ATM card and cheques.  

- Total Misappropriation: Approximately ₹85 lakhs were withdrawn via ATM, ₹1.5 crores were withdrawn using cheques, and ₹9 crores were allegedly transferred to various accounts.  


Defense and Prosecution Standpoints 

Defense Argument

- Customer Consent: Advocate Pankaj Kapoor, representing Vashista, argued that the funds were transferred based on the complainant’s instructions.  

- Service Provision: The withdrawals made using cheques and the ATM card were allegedly services provided to the complainant to save her from visiting the bank in person.  

- Channel Transfers: Most transactions were routed through legitimate banking channels, suggesting transparency.  


Prosecution Argument

- Breach of Trust: The Additional Public Prosecutor highlighted that Vashista, as a trustee of the client’s money, grossly misused his position.  

- Ongoing Investigation: While ₹9 crores were traced to various accounts, the actual end-beneficiaries of these transfers are still under investigation.  

- Employment Termination: An internal inquiry by ICICI Bank led to Vashista’s dismissal.  


High Court’s Observations

While granting bail, Justice Amit Mahajan emphasized:  

- No Requirement for Further Custody: Since evidence had been collected and the chargesheet filed, the court found no justification for continued custody.  

- Non-Punitive Nature of Bail: The court reiterated that the purpose of jail is to ensure the accused’s presence during the trial, not to serve as punishment.  

- Conditions for Bail: To prevent tampering with evidence, the court imposed conditions, including:  

  - Furnishing a ₹25,000 bail bond and two sureties.  

  - Surrendering his passport.  

  - Informing authorities about any change in residence.  

  - Avoiding contact with co-accused or witnesses.  


Nature of the Offense

The allegations against Vashista fall under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC):  

- Section 409: Criminal breach of trust by a banker.  

- Section 420: Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property.  

- Sections 467 & 468: Forgery for valuable security and cheating.  

- Section 471: Using forged documents as genuine.  

- Section 120B: Criminal conspiracy.  


A Timeline of Events

1. February 2, 2024: Vashista’s arrest.  

2. February 26, 2024: FIR registered by the Economic Offences Wing.  

3. January 2024: Complainant discovers discrepancies in her account.  

4. November 12, 2024: Delhi High Court grants bail.  


Ongoing Investigation  

Despite the bail, the investigation remains active. The prosecution has yet to establish the full scope of the conspiracy and identify all beneficiaries of the siphoned funds. Authorities continue to explore the role of co-accused individuals, including Vipin Mishra, and the recovery of misappropriated funds.  


Key Takeaways  

This case highlights:  

1. Need for Vigilance: Clients must remain cautious while entrusting large sums of money to financial institutions.  

2. Corporate Accountability: Banks need stricter protocols and internal checks to prevent such breaches of trust.  

3. Judicial Balance: The High Court’s decision underscores the importance of balancing justice with individual rights, ensuring due process for both victims and the accused.  


Impact on Financial Systems

Incidents like these tarnish public trust in banking institutions and call for:  

- Enhanced audit mechanisms.  

- Strict compliance checks for employees managing large accounts.  

- Transparent grievance redressal systems for customers.  


What’s Next?

As the trial unfolds, all eyes will be on the judiciary to determine whether justice is served and the victims’ losses are recovered.

Location: Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh, India

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Supreme Court Reinforces Due Process: Curbing “Bulldozer Justice” with Strict Guidelines

Image
Supreme Court Reinforces Due Process: Curbing “Bulldozer Justice” with Strict Guidelines Background In a significant judgment, the Supreme Court of India has set out guidelines to curb arbitrary demolitions, commonly referred to as "bulldozer justice." This term has emerged from instances where properties of individuals accused of crimes have been demolished without following due legal process. The ruling responds to several petitions highlighting the destruction of residential and commercial properties without prior notice, which, according to petitioners, targets marginalized and minority communities. Key Principles Addressed The Supreme Court’s decision rests on critical constitutional principles, particularly the rule of law, separation of powers, and protection of individual rights . The Court emphasized that no person should be punished without due process and that arbitrary action by the executive undermines citizens’ trust in the justice system. Justice Gavai, in del...
Read more

Equality Before Law

Image
                            Equality Before Law                                                   Introduction The rule of law was firstly introduced by A.V. Dicey in  his book "The Constitution Of England" in which there is rule which only prevails is law in which all are equal. In simple word if any wrong is being done which is not justifiable  by law committed by anyone that may be president, prime minister, or any individual are punishable because there is supremacy of law. Supremacy of law means the government which is power or the people who elected the government all will be treated equally before law.  Article 14 The Indian Constitution 1949, Article 14 guarantees "Equality before law The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the...
Read more