Why Did the Supreme Court Deny HDFC Bank CEO's Plea?
Click to start listening
Synopsis
The Supreme Court's decision not to entertain HDFC Bank CEO Sashidhar Jagdishan's plea raises questions about the implications of the FIR filed against him. The allegations of bribery involve a significant sum and highlight concerns over governance in charitable trusts. As the case progresses, the banking sector watches closely.
Key Takeaways
- The Supreme Court has refused to quash the FIR against HDFC Bank's CEO.
- Serious allegations include bribery involving Rs 2.05 crore.
- The case highlights governance issues within charitable trusts.
- Jagdishan's reputation and that of HDFC Bank are at stake.
- The Bombay High Court will hear the matter on July 14.
New Delhi, July 4 (NationPress) The Supreme Court has chosen not to entertain HDFC Bank's CEO and Managing Director Sashidhar Jagdishan's plea to annul an FIR filed against him. The complaint came from the Lilavati Kirtilal Mehta Medical Trust, which operates Mumbai's Lilavati Hospital, alleging that Jagdishan accepted a bribe amounting to Rs 2.05 crore.
A bench comprising Justices P.S. Narasimha and R. Mahadev stated that it would be inappropriate for the apex court to intervene while Jagdishan's plea to dismiss the criminal complaint is scheduled for consideration before the Bombay High Court on July 14.
After judges from the Bombay High Court recused themselves on at least three occasions, Jagdishan sought relief from the Supreme Court due to the delay in his petition's listing.
Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, representing Jagdishan, argued that the reputation of HDFC Bank is being tarnished due to an internal dispute among the trustees of the Lilavati Trust, necessitating an interim protection order. Nevertheless, the Justice Narasimha-led bench did not issue any interim orders and advised Rohatgi to present all arguments before the Bombay High Court.
“We understand the frustration regarding the recusal of the Bombay HC judges. It is unfortunate but the matter is now set for hearing,” remarked the apex court, expressing hope that the Bombay High Court would address the case on July 14.
On Thursday, the Supreme Court agreed to prioritize Jagdishan’s plea for a hearing on July 4 (Friday) after it was asserted that the FIR was “frivolous” and constituted an “arm-twisting tactic” aimed at obstructing HDFC Bank from recovering funds from the Lilavati Trust.
Jagdishan’s petition was previously heard in the Bombay High Court on June 30; however, due to the lack of urgency, it was rescheduled for July 14, prompting him to escalate the issue to the Supreme Court.
The FIR, filed last month at the Bandra police station in Mumbai under Sections 406 (criminal breach of trust), 409 (criminal breach of trust by a public servant), and 420 (cheating), contains serious accusations against Jagdishan.
The Lilavati Trust's complaint alleges that Jagdishan accepted a bribe of Rs 2.05 crore in exchange for providing financial guidance to the Chetan Mehta Group to maintain illegal control over the Trust's governance. The Trust accuses Jagdishan of abusing his position as the head of a prominent private sector bank to meddle in the affairs of a charitable organization.
Conversely, Jagdishan has vehemently denied the allegations, describing the case as a malicious effort to undermine him and HDFC Bank's reputation. He noted that HDFC, along with a consortium of banks, had extended loans to Splendour Gems Limited in 1995.
After the firm defaulted, recovery actions commenced in 2002 against its guarantors, including Kishor Mehta, father of Prashant Mehta. An arrest warrant was issued in 2020, and although Kishor Mehta passed away in 2024, proceedings against his sons continued.
Point of View
The Supreme Court's decision not to intervene in Sashidhar Jagdishan's case underscores the importance of judicial processes and the necessity for thorough investigations in matters involving public trust. Navigating allegations of bribery and governance in charitable organizations remains a sensitive topic, reflecting broader issues within the banking sector. As the case progresses, it will be crucial for all parties to uphold transparency and integrity.
NationPress
23/07/2025
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the main allegation against Sashidhar Jagdishan?
Sashidhar Jagdishan is accused of accepting a bribe of Rs 2.05 crore in exchange for providing financial advice that benefited the Chetan Mehta Group's control over the Lilavati Trust.
What did the Supreme Court decide regarding the plea?
The Supreme Court declined to entertain Jagdishan's plea to quash the FIR, indicating that it would be more appropriate for the Bombay High Court to address the matter.
What are the implications of this case for HDFC Bank?
The allegations and the ongoing legal proceedings could potentially impact the reputation and operations of HDFC Bank, raising concerns about trust and governance in the banking sector.
