Sterling Biotech Rs 8100-crore bank loan fraud case reassigned to same judge who recused earlier

Published On 2020-09-23 07:45 GMT | Update On 2020-09-23 07:46 GMT

New Delhi: A Rs 8,100-crore bank loan fraud case against the owners of Gujarat-based Sterling Biotech group and others was on Tuesday reassigned here to the same judge who a day earlier recused himself from hearing the matter, saying he was approached by one of the parties in the case. District Judge of Patiala House Courts complex sent back the case to Additional Sessions Judge Dharmendra...

New Delhi: A Rs 8,100-crore bank loan fraud case against the owners of Gujarat-based Sterling Biotech group and others was on Tuesday reassigned here to the same judge who a day earlier recused himself from hearing the matter, saying he was approached by one of the parties in the case. District Judge of Patiala House Courts complex sent back the case to Additional Sessions Judge Dharmendra Rana after the counsel for both the parties --the Enforcement Directorate(ED) and the accused--agreed to the same.

ASJ Rana on Monday had recused himself from hearing the matter, saying he was "shocked" as he was approached by one of his classmates on behalf of the accused, while terming the incident as "unfortunate".

"I don't feel like pursuing the matter. It's very embarrassing and I am recusing and posting the matter before District Judge. It's very unfortunate that after hearing the full matter I have to recuse...," the ASJ said while recusing himself. The judge was scheduled to pass an order on an application filed by ED, seeking to declare the owners of the company as fugitive economic offenders under a new law.

The ED had approached the court seeking to declare Nitin Sandesara, Chetan Sandesara, DiSandesara and Hitesh Patel fugitives under Section 4 of the Fugitive Economic Offenders Act.

According to the ED, all four are promoters of the Sterling Group and allegedly fled the country to avoid criminal probe against them in a Rs 8,100-crore bank loan fraud involving a consortium of banks.

Advocate Zoheb Hussain, who is one of the counsels for the ED, meanwhile, said a remark to this effect has been wrongly attributed to him in a media report on Monday's court proceedings on the recusal matter. Hussain clarified that no statement in respect of this case has been made by him.

Article Source : PTI

Disclaimer: This site is primarily intended for healthcare professionals. Any content/information on this website does not replace the advice of medical and/or health professionals and should not be construed as medical/diagnostic advice/endorsement/treatment or prescription. Use of this site is subject to our terms of use, privacy policy, advertisement policy. © 2024 Minerva Medical Treatment Pvt Ltd

Ruchika Sharma

Ruchika Sharma joined Medical Dialogue as an Desk Editor for the Business Section in 2019. She covers all the updates in the Pharmaceutical field, Policy, Insurance, Business Healthcare, Medical News, Health News, Pharma News, Healthcare and Investment. She has completed her B.Com from Delhi University and then pursued postgraduation in M.Com. She can be contacted at editorial@medicaldialogues.in Contact no. 011-43720751

Comments Policy

Our comments section is governed by our Comments Policy . By posting comments at Medical Dialogues you automatically agree with our Comments Policy , Terms And Conditions and Privacy Policy .

Sterling Biotech Rs 8100-crore bank loan fraud case reassigned to same judge who recused earlier

Similar News