Back
2019 Supreme(Del) 2488
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
SURESH KUMAR KAIT, J.
Bijender Singh Lather - Petitioner
Versus
Govt. of NCT of Delhi - Respondent
Bail Appln. 3023 of 2019
Decided On : 06-12-2019
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr.Siddhartha Luthra, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Jasbir Malik, Mr.Shantanu Sharma & Mr.Neeraj Khapra, Advs.
For the Respondent: Mr. Hirein Sharma, APP SI Kamal Kohli PS EOW.
The court's decision highlighted the significance of custodial interrogation in cases involving financial irregularities and the recovery of cheated amounts.
Headnote:
Anticipatory Bail - Economic Offences - Companies Act, 1956, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Cr.P.C. - Sections 406, 420, 120-B of IPC, Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Companies Act, 1956 - Summary of the acts and sections referenced and discussed by the court.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought anticipatory bail in a case related to allegations of financial irregularities and default in a real estate project. The petitioner, a director of a company, faced accusations related to financial mismanagement and non-compliance with legal obligations.
Finding of the Court:
The court dismissed the petitioner's plea for anticipatory bail, citing serious allegations and the need for custodial interrogation to uncover the conspiracy and recover the cheated amount.
Issues: The key issues revolved around the petitioner's role in the alleged financial irregularities, non-compliance with legal obligations, and the need for custodial interrogation to unearth the conspiracy and recover the cheated amount.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the serious nature of the allegations, the petitioner's key role in the case, and the necessity of custodial interrogation to uncover the conspiracy and recover the cheated amount.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the petitioner's plea for anticipatory bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the allegations and the need for custodial interrogation.
JUDGMENT :
Crl. M.A. 42063/2019
1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
2. Application is disposed of.
Bail Appln.3023/2019 & Crl.M.A. 42062/2019
3. Vide the present petition, the petitioner seeks direction thereby to grant anticipatory bail to the Petitioner in FIR No.59 of 2019 dated 04.04.2019 Police Station, Economic Offences Wing, Mandir Marg, New Delhi under Sections 406, 420 & 120-B of IPC.
4. The brief facts leading to filing of the said petition are that Prabhu Shanti Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "Company"), a private limited company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 in the year 2014, acted as a guarantor to a loan facility obtained by one of the sister concern Society of the Company i.e. Prabhu Dayal Memorial Religious Educational Association. The said Society defaulted in repayment of the loan to the lending Bank in pursuance to which the lending bank filed an application under section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 before the National Company Law Tribunal. The said Tribunal vide order dated 13.06.2018, initiated Corporate Insolvency Resolution Proceedings against the Company and appointed an Interim Resolution Professional to take over the management of the Company. However, the Petitioner made all endeavours to deliver possession of the flats to the Home Buyers including the complainant. The constructions of flats was completed up to 75-80% by June 2018, however, the Petitioner lost control of the company vide insolvency admission order passed by the NCLT, Delhi on 13.06.2018 against the Company. Thereafter, the Company preferred an Appeal before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) against the order dated 13.06.2018 passed on the ground that the Company was willing to settle the matter with the Lending Bank. But the Complainant, Smt.Suman Solanki filed the Complaint against the Company after passing of the order dated 13.06.2018 by the NCLT, i.e. when the Petitioner or any other Director of the Company was not in control of the management of the company. However, Petitioner though being a minority shareholder, took all necessary and active steps to regain control of the company in order to complete the construction of the real estate project and to deliver possession to the Complainant. In an endeavour to regain control of the Company, the Petitioner in his personal capacity, settled with the Lender Bank namely AU Small Finance Pvt. Ltd. vide settlement agreement dated 24.07.2018 and paid an amount of Rs. 2,32,00,000/- to the lending bank as part of the settlement amount. The said settlement agreement executed between the Petitioner and the lending bank was relied by the Petitioner before the NCLAT. However, the said tribunal refused to withdraw the Insolvency Proceedings against the Company, as there were other financial creditors and a Committee of Creditors had also been constituted by the Interim Resolution Professional. However, several homebuyers including the Complainant filed a Writ Petition before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India bearing number W.P.(C) 914/2018 and vide its order dated 03.12.2018, disposed of the said Writ Petition in view of an out of Court Settlement being entered into between the petitioners therein and the Company. On 08.02.2019, the homebuyers filed an M.A.No.286 of 2019 in W.P.(C) No.914 of 2018 and attempted to project as if there was not any settlement but Supreme Court of India out rightly rejected the application for modification of the order dated 03.12.2018.
5. Mr.Siddharth Luthra, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that FIR No. 59/2019 got registered against the petitioner along-with other accused at the behest of a Complaint filed by the Complainant, Smt.Suman Solanki with Police Station: EOW, Mandir Marg. The Complainant is one of the home buyers who had purchased a flat in the Project "PDM HI-TECH HOMES" of the Company. After filing of the Complaint and during the pendency of inve
