Why CBI FIR in NDTV matter has Corruption Act provisions alleged?

[Anonymous]

Mr. Dhamija Sir, you have shared the CBI FIR in the case of NDTV’s Prannoy Roy on your Twitter account. I was going through it and found that this FIR is filed under Sections 120-B r/w 420 IPC and Sections 13(2) r/2 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. However, in the list of 6 accused persons mentioned in the FIR, none of the accused is a public servant who can be booked for corruption. Only private persons’ conduct is mentioned in FIR. Then why did CBI apply sections of Prevention of Corruption Act in the FIR? Is it a misuse of power or ignorance of law?

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

Firstly, this FIR is available online at this link (for the benefit of those who have not seen it). Accused No. 4 mentioned in the FIR is “Unknown officials of ICICI Bank Ltd.”.

Recently, in the case of CBI v. Ramesh Gelli, (2016) 3 SCC 788 : AIR 2016 SC 1063 : 2016 Cri LJ 1576, by interpreting the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, and the Banking Regulation Act, 1949, the Supreme Court has held that employees / office-bearers of a private bank are also “public servants” for the purposes of Prevention of Corruption Act.

In view of this, the employees / office-bearers of ICICI Bank Ltd. would also be public servants for the purposes of corruption related offences. It may perhaps be due to this reason that the CBI has applied the sections of Prevention of Corruption Act in this FIR, since “Unknown officials of ICICI Bank Ltd.” are also named as accused persons in the FIR.

     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Author]

Posts