2011 (5) Supreme 562
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
P. Sathasivam and Dr. B.S. Chauhan, JJ.
Disha — Petitioner
versus
State of Gujarat & Ors. — Respondents
Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 33 of 2011
Decided on : 20-7-2011
Facts of the Case :
Present Writ petition has been filed by petitioner seeking directions that investigations into financial transactions of petitioner’s late husband and his associates through various firms, and the mysterious cause of her husband’s death in Hotel Marriott, Senapati Bapat Road, Pune be transferred to CBI and further to hand over all complaints made by various investors against firms owned by her family members to CBI for investigation.
Findings of the Court :
The Court held that Apex Court has transferred the matter to CBI or any other special agency only when Court was satisfied that accused had been very powerful and influential person or State authorities like high police officials were involved and investigation had not proceeded with in proper direction or it had been biased.However instantly petitioner herself was the accused. A huge amount of Rs.60 crores had been collected from innocent persons giving them false assurances that their amount would have a high premium. It had not been alleged in the petition that any of the investor was very powerful or capable to manage the investigation against the petitioner or that case of suicide of her husband was not properly investigated. It was no body’s case that police had unnecessarily harassed the petitioner.No allegation of mala fide or bias had been alleged against any investigating authority nor had it been pleaded that charge sheet had been filed against petitioner without investigating the case or having any vindictive attitude towards petitioner.None of the grounds taken by petitioner for transfer was hence held tenable.No cogent reason was found to interfere in the matter. Petition was dismissed
JUDGMENT
Dr. B.S. Chauhan, J. —
1. This writ petition has been filed for seeking the directions that investigations into the financial transactions of the petitioner’s late husband Shri Deven Malviya and his associates through various firms, and the mysterious cause of her husband’s death in Hotel Marriott, Senapati Bapat Road, Pune be transferred to Central Bureau of Investigation (hereinafter called CBI) under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as Cr.P.C.); and further to hand over all complaints made by various investors against the firms owned by her family members to the CBI for investigation.
2. Facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are as under:
A. Petitioner indulged herself in commercial/business activities alongwith her husband late Deven Malviya, particularly in share broking in the name and style of M/s Disha Credit and Marketing Services alongwith one another partner Mr. Ajay Gandeja in Nagpur from 1998 to 2004.
B. Late Mr. Deven Malviya, for certain reasons, shifted from Nagpur to Pune and started his own share broking business in the year 2007.
Petitioner’s husband and his maternal uncle namely, Shri Narendra Dhruv and his sons started share broking business in Rajkot in the name of M/s Vision Equities and Commodities and subsequently at Ahmedabad also. In 2008, another firm was constituted in the name of Vibrant Equities and Commodities, of which the petitioner was the proprietor.
C. During that period, i.e., between 2008 and 2010, petitioner’s husband, his maternal uncle and his sons appointed a large number of agents/franchises for their firms all over Gujarat and the said agents collected a huge amount from large number of persons/investors giving them assurance that their money would be multiplied within a short span of time.
D. On 28.12.2010, Late Deven Malviya, petitioner’s husband checked in Hotel Marriott at Senapati Bapat Marg, Pune in a Room on 20th floor. He jumped from 22nd floor of Hotel Marriott at 11.30 a.m. on 30.12.2010 and died spontaneously. The matter of death of petitioner’s husband is being investigated by Chhatushingi Police Station, Pune.
E. An FIR No. CR No. 1-18/2011 was lodged on 12.1.2011 at Gandhigram Police Station in Rajkot under Sections 406, 420 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter called IPC) by the complainant with the allegations that the partners/ agents/franchises of the firm owned by the petitioner herself had given fake promises to the complainant and other investors that they would get Rs.1,40,000/- in return of their investment of Rs.1,00,000/- within a short stipulated period. But the investors could not get any amount. The accused persons in conspiracy with each other made a fraudulent scheme duping the innocent investors.
F. The police filed a charge sheet against 13 accused persons including the petitioner after examining 23 witnesses. Seven accused have already been arrested and further investigation is in progress for obtaining the Forensic Science Laboratory report in connection with the seized Muddamaal (Crime property, e.g. Computer, CPU, Hard disk etc.). According to investigation held, so far, it is evident that the investors have been duped by petitioner’s Firms for a sum of Rs.60 crores.
3. The grounds on which the transfer is sought are as follows:
(1) Petitioner will face acute harassment owing to the number of investors.
(2) Petitioner likely to be victimised, and all associates, agents, partners would suppress material information fastening all charges on her to save themselves.
(3) Number of scattered complaints would lead to uncoordinated investigation and not uncovering the truth.
(4) Death in most suspicious circumstances since the alleged scam involves politicians, bureaucrats and influential business men who could have abetted the suicide since they invested crores of rupees.
(5) Petitioner is interested in finding out the truth.
(6) Interference needed for putting the investigation
Narmada Bai v. State of Gujarat
Vineet Narain & Ors. v. Union of India & Anr. AIR 1996 SC 3386
Kashmeri Devi v. Delhi Admn. & Anr., AIR 1988 SC 1323
R.S. Sodhi v. State of U.P. & Ors., AIR 1994 SC 38
Gudalure M.J. Cherian v. Union of India, (1992) 1 SCC 397
: Union of India v. Sushil Kumar Modi, (1998) 8 SCC 661)
Rajiv Ranjan Singh ‘Lalan’ (VIII) v. Union of India,(2006) 6 SCC 613
Rubabbuddin Sheikh v. State of Gujarat & Ors., AIR 2010 SC 3175
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.