Bombay HC Quashes Magistrate's Order Issuing Notice To HDFC MD Sashidhar Jagdishan Without Verifying Lilavati Hospital's Complaint Against Him

In an order granting relief to HDFC Bank's Managing Director, Sashidhar Jagdishan, the Bombay High Court has quashed and set aside an order passed by a Judicial Magistrate issuing notice to him in a private complaint lodged against him at the behest of Lilavati Kirtilal Mehta Medical Trust.Notably, the complainant Trust runs the famous Lilavati Hospital in Mumbai. In its FIR, the Trust has accused Jagdishan of accepting a bribe of Rs 2.05 crore from erstwhile Trustee Chetan Mehta, for giving him financial advice and helping him to retain control over the Trust's governance. It further accused Jagdishan of interfering in its internal affairs by misusing his position as the head of the HDFC bank.Single-judge Justice Shriram Modak noted that the Magistrate at Girgaon had issued a notice to the Jagdishan, a proposed accused, without verifying the complaint and the witnesses in the case and even before taking cognisance of the said complaint. The judge, refused to accept Lilavati's contention, as advanced by senior advocate Aabad Ponda that the proviso to section 223 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) justifies the Magistrate in issuing notice to the proposed accused as it should grant a right of audience to the said accused, before taking cognisance of the complaint. "Mr Ponda has argued vociferously to convince me to take a view that notice is required prior to recording verification. He was as forceful in his submissions as usual. He has also used all his persuasive skills to convince me to take that view. But unfortunately I cannot put a nod to his arguments for the reason that was not the intention of legislature," Justice Modak said in the order passed on August 5. The judge agreed with the views of various High Courts that the stage of taking cognisance would occur only after examining the Complainant and witnesses and not earlier immediately on filing of complaint. "So if we consider the chronology, it shows that after filing of complaint there has to be verification of the Complainant and witnesses and when prior to decision on taking cognizance is taken, the accused needs to be heard. Hearing the accused cannot be interpreted prior to recording the verification and the statement of witnesses if any. For these reason I am unable to accept the submission of Mr Ponda," the judge opined. The bench stressed on the fact that there is a purpose of recording the verification as it gives an opportunity to the Magistrate to ascertain whether to proceed further or not. "When the accused is recognised with a right of audience, they have got every right to insist on the compliance of the procedure regarding verification. Certainly error committed by the Magistrate can be corrected by resorting to the provisions of Article 227 of the Constitution," the judge said.The judge, therefore, quashed the order issuing notice to Jagdishan, However, the judge, refused to quash the entire complaint itself."The proposed accused would still get a chance to challenge any order passed by the Magistrate after the verification is recorded before appropriate forum. Further more they will be given a right of audience before the Magistrate after verification is recorded. This is sufficient protection of the rights to the proposed accused," the judge observed, while refusing to quash the complaint. With these observations, the court disposed of the petition. Appearance:Senior Advocates Ravi Kadam and Sudeep Passbola along with Advocates Sandeep Singhi, ChandanSingh Shekhawat, Sanskruti Harode and Rohin Chauhan instructed by Parinam Law Associates appeared for the Petitioner. Senior Advocate Aabad Ponda along with Advocates Monish Bhatia, Hemant Ingle, Minal Chandnani, Jyoti Ghag and Ankit Singhal instructed by Dua Associates represented the Complainant. Additional Public Prosecutor NB Patil represented the State. Case Title: Sashidhar Jagdishan vs State of Maharashtra (Criminal Writ Petition 4153 of 2025)Click Here To Read/Download Judgment

Bombay HC Quashes Magistrate's Order Issuing Notice To HDFC MD Sashidhar Jagdishan Without Verifying Lilavati Hospital's Complaint Against Him

Narsi Benwal

Tags