SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1992 Supreme(Del) 141

High Court Of Delhi
P.K.PARMAR - Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA - Respondent
Criminal Miscellaneous (Main) 2360 of 1990
Decided On : 02/28/1992

Advocates Appeared:
N.L.CHAUDHARY, S.Lal, U.K.BACHAVAT

Headnote:INDIAN PENAL CODE 1860 - Section 102 — Petition under Article 227 read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure-Petition for quashing order of CBI directing various banks, financial insstitutions and post offices freezing Petitioners Accounts — Petitioner withdrawing subsidy without actually manufacturing phosphate and fertilizers by producing bogus documents — Subsidies drawn kept in various Bank — Accounts, lockers and policies — Recovery of assets links prima facie with commission of various offences-Directions by CBI to various bankers/financial institutions freezing accounts of petitioners based on sound footing.

       Held:

       That without actually manufacturing phosphate and fertilizers, the first petitioner withdrew as much as Rs. 3.39 crores as subsidy from the Government of India by producing bogus documents.

       It was only in consequence of weighty suspicions against the petitioners, who are alleged to be none other than the show pieces of the first petitioner, that amount of subsidies drawn by him were presumably kept in various bank accounts, lockers and invested in various policies by the first petitioner fraudulently in the name of all other petitioners. So the recovery of such assets links prima facie with the commission of various offences with which they have been charged by the CBI. The suspicion of CBI is not that the sale proceeds of fertilizers have been held in various accounts by the petitioners. In fact, according to CBI there was no manufacture of fertilizers by the firm at all and all the documents regarding alleged purchase of raw material for the same and its sale were forged/fabricated solely with the intention of cheating the Government and realize subsidies from it and invest the same in fake names by the first petitioner. The issuance of directions by the CBI to various bankers/financial institutions freezing the accounts of the petitioners is based on a sound footing in the present case. There is no reason to interfere in the steps taken by the CBI.

R. L. GUPTA,j.

( 1 ) THE petitioners, 30 in number, have filed this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Code for short) for quashing the orders of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI for short) directing the various banks, financial Institutions and Post offices with which the petitioners have their respective accounts, to freeze those accounts. The CBI claims to have exercised such powers under Section 102 of the Code. The brief facts necessary for the disposal of this petition are that petitioners 1 and 4-who are brothers have been doing business of the manufacture and sale of phosphate fertilizers in Punjab. Initially they started this business in partnership with four others (not parties to the present petition) under the name and style of M/s Punjab Fertilizers and Pesticide Industries (PFPI for short) with its registered office at Amritsar. The firm continued its business upto 8. 6. 83 when it was dissolved and business taken over by a Private Limited Company known as the Punjab Phosphates (P) Ltd. (PPPL for short) again with its registered office at Amritsar. Petitioner No. I claims to be its Managing Director while petitioner No. 2, a Director. The Union of India, the first respondent introduced a scheme of subsidy to sustain and ensure the healthy development of phosphate industry in the year 1976. To reap the benefit of this scheme, the firm gave the required undertaking regarding the manufacture and sale of phosphate fertilizers. Although a copy of such undertaking is not available with the petitioners containing the material terms and conditions. One of its terms is claimed to be as follows:.

"we futher undertake that if the aforesaid amount is not credited by us in the time limits specified above, we shall pay interst at the rate of 2. 5% above the ruling bank rate for working capital loans as prescribed in the Government of India specimen of Undertaking/ Agreement or at the rate as Fixed from time to time. We also undertake and promise to abide by the decisions of the Committee which is final and binding on all matters relating to the determination of the fair price. "

( 2 ) AN intimation regarding the business of the firm having been taken over by the Company is alleged to have sent to the concerned department of the State Government as well as the Union of India with a request to record the change, with the same Undertaking. In 1986, the Company shifted its factory from Amritsar to Bahadur Garh in the state of Haryana under intimation to the Union of India. Factory, however is alleged to be lving closed since the end of 1987. The firm/company, claimed amount of subsidy according to their entitlement in respect of the goods actually manufactured and sold from 1980 through May, 1987. Since no sales were carried out thereafter, no claim for any subsidy was prepared either at Amritsar or at Bahadur Garh. The CBI lodged fivefirs during the course of investigation in respect of some transactions against some of the petitioners detailed in para 2. 6 of the petition. The substance of one of such FIR No. 11 of 11-11-1988 is as follows:

"on a reliable information received by it to the effect that the 1st petitioner during the year 1980, entered into a criminal conspiracy with certain unknown persons and started a firm under the name and style of M/s Punjab Chemicals and Fertilizers Limited with its registered office at Ram Bagh Gate, Opposite Church. Amritsar, Punjab in the same year for manufacturing of Super phosphate Fertilizer and the same was registered with the department of Industries, Arnritsar, Punjab on 10 July 1980. The name of the said firm was later on changed to PPPL, Amritsar with effect from 5th May, 1983. The factory is alleged to have been located at Nehru Park. Azad Road, Chheharata. Amritsar, Punjab. The Firm had an installed capacity of 36,000 -Metric tonnes and utilized capacity of 15,000 Metric tonnes of super phosphate












Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top