Bombay High Court Reserves Order In Kochhar Couple's Arrest Case
Chanda Kochhar's counsel Amit Desai argued for quashing of CBI FIR on grounds of ‘illegality’ in arrest.
The Bombay High Court has reserved its order in a petition filed by former Chief Executive Officer and Managing Director of ICICI Bank Ltd., Chanda Kochhar, and her husband Deepak Kochhar challenging their arrest. The court is likely to pronounce its orders on Monday.
The couple has approached the Bombay High Court seeking quashing of the FIR filed against them on grounds of ‘illegality’ in arrest. They have also sought release as an interim relief in the light of their son’s wedding scheduled for Jan. 15. The couple is currently in judicial custody.
According to Amit Desai, counsel representing Chanda Kochhar, the arrest was illegal as it abandoned the requirements set in procedural law. The arrest, according to him, was made after sunset in violation of law that requires a woman to be arrested only by a woman officer, except under special circumstances.
Desai further argued that-
No proper reasons are recorded signifying the necessity of arrest when there was sufficient cooperation by Chanda Kochhar.
According to the arrest memo, the arrest was made on account of non-cooperation and non-production of true facts. But the facts show a history of cooperation by her. She has fully cooperated with all the interrogations that took place in 2018 and 2019, and voluntarily opted to give a complete explanation of the case several times. Detailed statements were recorded.
No investigation by the CBI took place in 2019, 2020 and 2021 and suddenly in 2022 she was summoned to appear after four years into the probe. There was no disobedience even at this juncture. In some instances, the dates for appearance were indeed modified, however, this was made on a mutual basis showing that there was cooperation at every stage of investigation.
Merely because Chanda failed to provide the information required by the authorities cannot be dubbed as non-cooperation. Chanda had denied knowledge of any monetary transaction between her husband and [Venugopal] Dhoot. This is just a whimsical and arbitrary arrest.Amit Desai, Counsel, Chanda Kochhar
The arrest has been made in violation of statutory and constitutional rights against arrest, Desai argued. The law requires police officers to show restraint in arrest and not take such measures as long as the accused cooperates and complies with the notice. The arrest should not have been made, he said.
Desai said that being a woman, Chanda Kochhar couldn't have been arrested by a male officer of the CBI. He acknowledged that there was a female officer present for search but added that it can't be construed as arrest by a woman. "Arrest memo and search memo are indeed two different documents and therefore must be viewed separately."
Finally, the arrest was also made without sufficient notice, Desai alleged. The law requires that sufficient notice be given prior to an arrest which was not met in the instant case.
Violation of these procedural laws warrant bail, according to Desai.
Raja Thakare, counsel for the Central Bureau of Investigation, countered Desai on several points.
There is no necessity to record a detailed reasoning for arrest in the arrest memo as the details would be reflected in the case diary. Not providing true facts is sufficient for an arrest memo, he argued.
The court, too, was satisfied with the reasons for arrest as is reflected in the remand order, he said. This was to counter Desai's argument that the court should not merely refer to documents that are part of the investigation, and there should be a judicial application of mind.
Thakare further argued that:
There is nothing on record to show that the arrest was made by a male officer. The arrest-cum-search memo clearly showed that there was a female officer present at the occasion of arrest.
Violation, if at all, of procedural law should itself not warrant bail. Nothing more than departmental actions can be warranted under such circumstances.
Vikram Chaudhary, counsel for Deepak Kochhar, also argued before the High Court on Friday. According to him, the power of arrest vested with the police is not limitless. It should not be used as a tool for punishment. The allegation of non-cooperation is insufficient when it doesn’t explain the kind of non-cooperation they have encountered, he said.
Thakare, however, disagreed with the argument and said the court should not allow the petition as writs can’t be a substitute for bail. "This is in light of the fact that they have not even applied for bail."
Chanda Kochhar, Ex-CEO and MD of ICICI Bank and her husband Deepak Kochhar were arrested by CBI on Dec. 23, 2022, four years after the probe began. The case relates to irregularities in loans advanced by ICICI Bank to Videocon Group in 2012 while Chanda Kochhar was in charge. These loans later turned out to be non-performing assets.
An investigation into the loans by CBI in 2019 had revealed that Deepak Kochhar’s Nupower Renewables Pvt. significantly benefited from the Rs 3,250 crore loans advanced by ICICI Bank. Videocon’s promoter Venugopal Dhoot allegedly made investments in Kochhar’s company soon after the loans were granted.
