The legal battle pits the Lilavati Kirtilal Mehta Medical Trust (represented by permanent trustee Prashant Kishore Mehta) against Sashidhar Jagdishan, the Managing Director and CEO of HDFC Bank.
The Trust’s Allegations
Represented by senior advocate Sidharth Luthra, the current trustees allege that Jagdishan colluded with the hospital’s erstwhile (former) trustees to siphon money out of the charitable trust’s fund. Specifically, the trust claims Jagdishan directly received approximately ₹2.05 crore in illegal payments between March 2022 and June 2023.
The trust argued that the Bombay High Court prematurely killed a legitimate economic offense investigation before the police could properly interrogate the accused or analyze documentary evidence.
The Defense & High Court Stance
Represented by senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, Jagdishan’s defense maintains that the criminal case is completely fabricated. This stance was validated by the Bombay High Court on May 5, 2026, when it officially quashed the FIR, labeling the criminal complaint an “abuse of the process of court.”
The High Court highlighted two critical contextual facts:
-
The Mehta Family Feud: There is extreme internal acrimony, distrust, and fractured relations between the current trustees and the former trustees of the Mehta family.
-
The ₹65 Crore Debt: The court ruled that the criminal complaint was a direct fallout of aggressive loan recovery proceedings. HDFC Bank is actively trying to recover ₹65 crores in outstanding dues from the Lilavati Trust. The current trustees allegedly blamed these high-pressure recovery tactics for the death of their father.
Why the Supreme Court is Involved
The Lilavati Trust appealed to the Supreme Court to overturn the High Court’s quashing of the FIR and to force an independent probe by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), alleging corruption and local police inaction.
A Supreme Court bench consisting of Justices M M Sundresh and N Kotiswar Singh has taken a measured step:
-
The Action: The SC issued an official notice to Sashidhar Jagdishan, requiring him to formally respond to the trust’s petition.
-
The Nuance: Despite issuing the notice, the bench indicated it is not entirely inclined to interfere with the High Court’s ruling to quash the specific FIR. The Justices noted that if there is a broader financial conspiracy or siphoning of trust funds, those elements can be investigated under other separate, active FIRs rather than this specific personal complaint against the CEO.
What Happens Next?
The Supreme Court has scheduled the next round of arguments for August 2026, at which point Jagdishan’s legal team will submit their formal reply to the top court. Until then, the Bombay High Court’s order blocking the criminal investigation remains the dominant ruling.
