Mumbai: Court Dismisses Culpable Homicide Plea Against Lilavati Trust And Bank Executives In Founder Kishore Mehta’s Death

Mumbai: Court Dismisses Culpable Homicide Plea Against Lilavati Trust And Bank Executives In Founder Kishore Mehta’s Death |

Mumbai: The prosecution cannot be launched for causing death due to harassment against a person or organization, when the act was done by them to exhaust their legal remedies to recover money, the Metropolitan Magistrate court, Bandra has held while rejecting the plea filed to prosecute the Lilavati trust and a private bank after the death of founder trustee Kishore Mehta.

Lilavati Kirtilal Mehta Medical (LKMM) Trust had approached the court through it’s permanent trustee Prashant Mehta, seeking direction to register First Information Report against proposed eleven accused which included – trustees and former trustees of LKMMT – Chetan Mehta, Rashmi Mehta, Bhavin Mehta, Niket Mehta, Sushila Mehta, Nimesh Sheth, Ayushman Mehta, Dilip Sanghvi, and senior executives of a private bank namely – Sashidharan Jagdishan, Sudhir Jha, Pranesh Rao.

Prashant had sought to register a case of culpable homicide not amounting to murder contending that after long legal battle between present trustees and previous trustees. Prashant contended that various coercive means for recovery of the dues were initiated by the bank, at the instance, erstwhile trustees to harass deceased Kishor Mehta and his family on account of grudge carried by them as they lost control over the trust.

It was further claimed that, ‘several proceedings initiated by bank for recovery of the dues. Coercive means followed were continued despite requests made by deceased Kishor Mehta and his family members, ignoring his precarious health condition. On the basis of false claims and false documents various orders obtained against him and finally this harassment resulted in the death of Kishor Mehta on May 14, 2024.

The court, however, dismissed the complaint observing that, “For this purpose the whole set of allegations, if taken into account it shows that whatever acts are done by the respondents were done by them in prosecution of their legal claims i.e. recovery of arrears of loan amount. They are not an authority in themselves, they acted on the basis of lawful orders passed by competent tribunals/courts and that too after disputing their legality by the deceased himself. In such a situation it can not be said that actions are deliberate with view to harass the deceased.”

Besides the court further said, “The whole set of allegations even if accepted as it is, it lacks such certainty for want of close proximity between the incidence of death of Kishor Mehta and the acts of recoveries and means for it, followed by the respondents.”

_{Images are for reference only.Images and contents gathered automatic from google or 3rd party sources.All rights on the images and contents are with their legal original owners.}