A special court on Monday reserved its decision on the bail plea of Ravindra Marathe, CEO and MD of Bank of Maharashtra, who was arrested last week for allegedly misusing powers while giving loans to fraud-accused realtor D.S. Kulkarni.
Special Judge Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (MPID) Act R.N. Sardesai postponed the decision till Tuesday. Special Public Prosecutor Ujjwala Pawar said that the prosecution had no problem in granting bail to Mr. Marathe as the Economic and Offences Wing had submitted a no-objection certificate on the matter. Mr. Marathe is likely be granted bail on Tuesday.
Ms. Pawar said, “The police have said that there is no further need of [Mr. Marathe’s] custody as the probe against him is complete and that they have the obtained the requisite documents.”
Defence lawyer Harshad Nimbalkar challenged Mr. Marathe’s arrest and questioned the applicability of the MPID Act in the case. Advocate Sachin Thombare, another defence lawyer, said, “No complaint has emerged against these officials from within the bank. The police, in this case, have acted beyond their powers to arrest them without seeking a sanction to prosecute bank officials as required under section 58E [cognisable offences] of the Reserve Bank of India Act.”
Mr. Marathe’s bail application on June 23 said the bank officials neither accepted any investment from the public nor had they promised anyone return of money in a stipulated time.
It further said BoM’s outstanding exposure to D Kulkarni Developers Limited was fully secured by primary and collateral securities and that the bank had initiated the recovery process.
Norms flouted: investors
However, Advocate Amit Deshpande, representing investors who had filed a case of cheating against D.S. Kulkarni, submitted a written objection against Mr. Marathe’s bail on their behalf.
He said, “We have contended that BoM authorities flouted RBI norms while extending loans to the DSK group of companies. Further, we have stated that the bank authorities continued to extend loans to the developer despite knowing his acute financial condition.”
