Mumbai court junks UK-based accused couple's plea for virtual appearance in bank scam case

A Mumbai court has rejected a plea of a couple, former senior New India Co-operative Bank officials and accused in an alleged Rs 122-crore fraud, to appear before it through video conferencing from the UK, saying their request reeks of huge abysmal entitlement.

A Mumbai court has rejected a plea of a couple, former senior New India Co-operative Bank officials and accused in an alleged Rs 122-crore fraud, to appear before it through video conferencing from the UK, saying their request ''reeks of huge abysmal entitlement''. The couple sought exemption from personal appearance, citing ''hostile environment'' and ''threats to their lives'' if they return to India, and offered to appear in the court virtually. If such prayers are accepted, there will be no sanctity left in investigation and the following trial, Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (ACJM) Abhijit Solapure (Esplanade court) remarked in his order while rejecting their plea last week. Hiren Bhanu and his wife Gauri, the then-chairperson and vice-chairperson of New India Co-operative Bank Ltd, respectively, were at the helm of the lender when the massive financial scandal came to light early last year. The Mumbai Police's Economic Offences Wing (EOW), which is probing the fraud case, has alleged misappropriation of more than Rs 122 crore from the bank over a period of five years (2020 and 2025). While other high-ranking officials of the bank, including the then-CEO and general manager, have already been arrested, the Bhanus left India for the United Kingdom (UK) on January 26, 2025, just before investigation into the scam began. In the plea, the duo sought exemption from personal appearance, citing ''hostile environment'' and threats to their lives if they return to India. The accused couple claimed they left India for personal reasons and had no knowledge of the fraud at the bank. However, the EOW countered their claim, saying the accused had all the knowledge of the offence and hence left for the UK just before the investigation started. If such a liberty (to appear via video link) is granted to the accused, it would severely prejudice the further investigation and the trial, the police submitted in the court. The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate noted that proclamation has been duly published and the accused were directed to appear before the court on September 30, 2025. But instead of appearing as per directions the accused chose to file present application seeking several reliefs, the order stated. ''The entire application reeks of huge entitlement of these accused,'' the court noted. The magistrate highlighted that the accused are putting forth a case of their personal difficulties and ''so called threat to their life in case they return to India''. However, no such demonstration was on record and rather this cannot be even a reason to avoid the appearance in person before the court, he said. The court asserted that ''these reasons have been carefully manufactured, prepared and are being demonstrated to show the investigating machinery in poor light''. The magistrate underlined that the reasons put forth by the accused ''falls flat on the floor and cannot be accepted by any person of ordinary prudence''. ''...the offence was not committed in a short span of weeks or months, but it went on for years together under the nose of these accused. It cannot, by any stretch of imagination, be considered that the accused had no iota of idea of these things,'' the court said. It concluded that this application cannot be considered as their appearance before the court. They cannot be even allowed to appear through their advocate or via video conferencing considering the peculiar circumstances before this court, observed the order. ''Such kind of abysmal entitlement shown by the accused cannot be entertained,'' the court ruled.