VISHAL EXPORTS OVERSEAS LTD. AND ANR. vs CBI Advocate - Satish Garg — 35/2024
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 438. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 23rd April 2026.
Cr Rev - CRIMINAL REVISION
CNR: DLCT110009742024
Filing Number
963/2024
Filing Date
09-Oct-2024
Registration No
35/2024
Registration Date
14-Oct-2024
Court
District and Sessions Judge cum Special Judge PC Act CBI, Rouse Avenue
Judge
1-Principal District and Sessions Judge cum Special Judge (Pc Act) (Cbi)
Decision Date
23-Apr-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISMISSED
Last updated 27-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.VISHAL EXPORTS OVERSEAS LTD. AND ANR.
Adv. Ashok Chhaparia
-
2.PRADEEP SUBHASH CHANDRA MEHTA
Adv. Ashok Chahparia
Respondent(s)
-
1.CBI Advocate - Satish Garg
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
23-Apr-2026
Copy Of OrderView PDF
-
23-Apr-2026
Copy Of OrderView PDF
The court dismissed the revision petition filed by Vishal Exports Overseas Ltd. and its Managing Director, upholding the charge framing order in a case involving alleged cheating and forgery in a rice export scheme. The court found sufficient prima facie evidence that the company sold 1,167 MT of subsidized rice in the open market instead of exporting it as contracted, and submitted forged export documents to FCI, rejecting arguments about lack of evidence, absence of victim/wrongful gain, and Delhi's lack of territorial jurisdiction. The court emphasized that at the charge stage, courts need only assess whether there is strong suspicion and prima facie case, not conduct a detailed evaluation of guilt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
23-Apr-2026
Disposed
Principal District and Sessions Judge cum Special Judge (Pc Act) (Cbi)
-
13-Apr-2026
Copy Of OrderView PDF
-
13-Apr-2026
Order
Principal District and Sessions Judge cum Special Judge (Pc Act) (Cbi)
-
06-Apr-2026
Copy Of OrderView PDF
-
06-Apr-2026
Arguments
Principal District and Sessions Judge cum Special Judge (Pc Act) (Cbi)
-
30-Mar-2026
Copy Of OrderView PDF
-
30-Mar-2026
Arguments
Principal District and Sessions Judge cum Special Judge (Pc Act) (Cbi)
-
23-Mar-2026
Copy Of OrderView PDF
-
23-Mar-2026
Arguments
Principal District and Sessions Judge cum Special Judge (Pc Act) (Cbi)
-
25-Feb-2026
Copy Of OrderView PDF
-
25-Feb-2026
Arguments
Principal District and Sessions Judge cum Special Judge (Pc Act) (Cbi)
-
25-Feb-2026
Restored
Principal District and Sessions Judge cum Special Judge (Pc Act) (Cbi)
-
25-Feb-2026
Arguments
Principal District and Sessions Judge cum Special Judge (Pc Act) (Cbi)
-
28-Jan-2025
Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF
-
28-Jan-2025
Copy Of OrderView PDF
-
28-Jan-2025
Disposed
Principal District and Sessions Judge cum Special Judge (Pc Act) (Cbi)
-
25-Jan-2025
Copy Of OrderView PDF
-
25-Jan-2025
Order
Principal District and Sessions Judge cum Special Judge (Pc Act) (Cbi)
-
08-Jan-2025
Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF
-
08-Jan-2025
Order
Principal District and Sessions Judge cum Special Judge (Pc Act) (Cbi)
-
07-Dec-2024
Copy Of OrderView PDF
-
07-Dec-2024
Misc. Arguments
Principal District and Sessions Judge cum Special Judge (Pc Act) (Cbi)
-
25-Nov-2024
Copy Of OrderView PDF
-
25-Nov-2024
Misc. cases
Principal District and Sessions Judge cum Special Judge (Pc Act) (Cbi)
-
13-Nov-2024
Copy Of OrderView PDF
-
22-Oct-2024
Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF
-
22-Oct-2024
Misc. cases
Principal District and Sessions Judge cum Special Judge (Pc Act) (Cbi)
-
14-Oct-2024
Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF
-
14-Oct-2024
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
09-Oct-2024
Case filed
Registration No. 35/2024
The court dismissed the revision petition filed by Vishal Exports Overseas Ltd. and its Managing Director, upholding the charge framing order in a case involving alleged cheating and forgery in a rice export scheme. The court found sufficient prima facie evidence that the company sold 1,167 MT of subsidized rice in the open market instead of exporting it as contracted, and submitted forged export documents to FCI, rejecting arguments about lack of evidence, absence of victim/wrongful gain, and Delhi's lack of territorial jurisdiction. The court emphasized that at the charge stage, courts need only assess whether there is strong suspicion and prima facie case, not conduct a detailed evaluation of guilt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts