FIR by Lilavati Trust against HDFC Bank CEO was out of personal vendetta: Bombay High Court

The case lodged by Lilavati Trust against HDFC Bank Managing Director and CEO Sashidhar Jagdishan stemmed from a personal vendetta rather than genuine criminal conduct, the Bombay High Court observed on Tuesday [Sashidhar Jagdishan v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.].In its order order quashing criminal proceedings against Jagdishan, the High said that the case filed by Lilavati Trust against Jagdishan was a fallout of recovery proceedings initiated by HDFC bank against the Trust."A personal vendetta writ large on the face of proceedings for recovery is something which we strongly perceive as a reason for interference," the court observed.The FIR, registered on the order of a Magistrate, alleged that Jagdishan had received ₹2.05 crores in bribes from former trustees. These alleged payments were supposedly made to manipulate recovery proceedings, it was claimed..A division bench of Justices MS Karnik and NR Borkar observed in their 53-page judgment that the complaint filed by the Lilavati Kirtilal Mehta Medical Trust was a counterblast to the recovery proceedings initiated by HDFC Bank to recover outstanding dues exceeding ₹65 crores.“We are more than satisfied that the filing of the complaint by Lilavati Trust and Prashant Mehta, a trustee, is a fallout of the recovery proceedings initiated by the financial institutions. The complaint is nothing but a counterblast to the recovery proceedings initiated and the materials on record do not at all justify an investigation into the claim made by the complainant,” the Court held. .The complaint against Jagdishan was lodged by the trust through its representative Prashant MehtaThe case is linked to HDFC Bank's recovery efforts against a company, Splendour Gems Limited, for dues totalling ₹65.22 crore.In 1995, a consortium including HDFC Bank had sanctioned loans to Splendour Gems Limited, guaranteed personally by the owner Prashant Mehta’s family including his late father Kishore Mehta. Following persistent default, HDFC Bank filed a recovery suit in 2002. The Debt Recovery Tribunal issued a recovery certificate for ₹14.74 crores plus interest in 2004, but the borrowers stalled payment for nearly two decades through legal challenges..After Kishore Mehta’s death in May 2024, his son Prashant Mehta, now a trustee of Lilavati Kirtilal Mehta Medical Trust, filed a criminal complaint against HDFC Bank officials, blaming them for his father’s death through harassment. He also alleged that former trustees bribed the HDFC Bank CEO ₹2.05 crores, citing a cash diary photocopy. In 2025, a Magistrate directed an FIR against the CEO and former trustees, which was registered at Bandra police station.Jagdishan then approached the High Court to quash the same. .The High Court emphasised that the criminal complaint emerged only after the trust's legal representatives faced mounting pressure from debt recovery proceedings including arrest warrants issued by the Debt Recovery Tribunal.The Court also found a ‘personal vendetta writ large on the face of the proceedings for recovery’. It found the allegations, even if taken at face value, did not disclose any entrustment or dishonest inducement. .The Court concluded that continuance of the investigation in these facts and circumstances would be nothing but an abuse of the process of court and proceeded to quash the FIR. [Read Judgment]