Telangana High Court has granted the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) the green light to proceed with the prosecution of former Global Trust Bank’s Chairman and Managing Director (CMD) Ramesh Gelli, along with Executive Director (ED) Sridhar Subasri.
Telangana High Court has granted the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) the green light to proceed with the prosecution of former Global Trust Bank’s Chairman and Managing Director (CMD) Ramesh Gelli, along with Executive Director (ED) Sridhar Subasri. This case, rooted in allegations of financial misconduct under the Prevention of Corruption (PC) Act, overturns a previous 2010 ruling by a special CBI court which had discharged the accused on the basis that they did not qualify as public servants.
Justice EV Venugopal, presiding over the matter, highlighted that Section 46A of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949, explicitly categorizes the Managing Director and the Executive Director of a bank, which operates under a license issued by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI), as public servants. This pivotal interpretation aligns with a Supreme Court judgment that previously recognized Gelli and Subasri’s status as public servants, thereby making them eligible for prosecution under the PC Act.
“When the core issue i.e. whether the respondents are public servants or not is decided by the Hon’ble Apex Court holding that they are public servants and they also come under the purview of the PC Act, this Court is not inclined to take any different view on this aspect,”
Justice Venugopal articulated, affirming the Supreme Court’s stance and setting a precedent for the case’s progression.
The origins of this legal battle trace back to 2005 when the CBI lodged a case against Gelli and Subasri, accusing them of conspiring to defraud the bank and inflict financial losses amounting to ₹10.25 crore. Despite being chargesheeted in 2008, the duo was discharged by the trial court in 2010, which concluded that the PC Act’s provisions did not apply to them based on a Bombay High Court ruling that favored the accused.
Challenging the trial court’s decision, the CBI approached the High Court, arguing that the accused indeed meet the criteria of public servants as per the PC Act, courtesy of Section 46-A of the Banking Regulation Act. Justice Venugopal concurred with the CBI’s argument, emphasizing that the allegations against Gelli and Subasri involve the misuse of their official positions and the mismanagement of public funds.
“Hence, they are liable to be prosecuted for the offences covered under the provisions of PC Act,”
the Court concluded, thereby paving the way for their prosecution.
This decision also took into account the Supreme Court’s 2016 ruling, which effectively overruled the Bombay High Court judgment that had initially led to the discharge of the accused. By setting aside the trial court’s order, the Telangana High Court has underscored the judiciary’s commitment to ensuring accountability and integrity within the banking sector.
Representing the CBI was Special Public Prosecutor Anandi, while Senior Counsel L Ravi Chander, along with Advocates E Umamaheshwar Rao and C Sharan Reddy, represented the accused. This case marks a significant moment in India’s legal landscape, reinforcing the principle that individuals in positions of financial trust and authority are subject to the nation’s laws against corruption and misconduct.
