The Supreme Court on Friday declined to entertain a plea filed by HDFC Bank Managing Director and CEO Sashidhar Jagdishan seeking to quash an FIR registered against him. The court observed that the matter is already scheduled to be heard by the Bombay High Court on July 14.
A bench headed by Justice PS Narsimha refused to stay the proceedings initiated in connection with allegations of financial irregularities involving the Lilavati Kirtilal Mehta Medical Trust, which manages Lilavati Hospital in Mumbai.
Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for Jagdishan, submitted that “the bank has been roped in a private dispute. The idea is to summon him to the police station. It will create havoc for the bank. It is affecting my personal reputation.”
Responding to the submission, the bench said, “We will not apply our mind on the merits. The case is listed on the 14th July. We hope it will be taken up on that day.”
Jagdishan approached the top court after an FIR was lodged, citing his alleged role in the financial dealings related to the Trust. The Supreme Court, however, decided not to intervene and allowed the Bombay High Court to take its course.
However, the court observed that it sympathises with him (as the matter could not be heard due to recusal by the three HC benches. “It is unfortunate,” the judge further said.
A bench headed by Justice PS Narsimha refused to stay the proceedings initiated in connection with allegations of financial irregularities involving the Lilavati Kirtilal Mehta Medical Trust, which manages Lilavati Hospital in Mumbai.
Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for Jagdishan, submitted that “the bank has been roped in a private dispute. The idea is to summon him to the police station. It will create havoc for the bank. It is affecting my personal reputation.”
Responding to the submission, the bench said, “We will not apply our mind on the merits. The case is listed on the 14th July. We hope it will be taken up on that day.”
Jagdishan approached the top court after an FIR was lodged, citing his alleged role in the financial dealings related to the Trust. The Supreme Court, however, decided not to intervene and allowed the Bombay High Court to take its course.
However, the court observed that it sympathises with him (as the matter could not be heard due to recusal by the three HC benches. “It is unfortunate,” the judge further said.
You may also like
India take on Thailand in decisive clash to reach AFC Women's Asian Cup 2026
Lioness Lucy Bronze reveals adorable nephew 'thinks aunty's house is a stadium'
Taylor Fritz vs Alejandro Davidovich Fokina paused for 'distressing' incident at Wimbledon
Spain hit by poisoning outbreak as 162 fall ill
Max Verstappen replacement named by Christian Horner as Red Bull boss gets cheeky
