IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA
VINEET SARAN, C.J. AND Dr. B.R. SARANGI, J.
W.P.(C) No. 9996 of 2016
In the matter of an application under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India.
Decided on 25th January, 2017.
Seashore Securities Limited … Petitioner
Versus
State of Odisha and others … Opp. Parties
2. WORDS AND PHRASES - ‘Locus standi’ - Petition at the instance of Company/Corporate Body challenging initiation/pendency of proceeding against individuals, who might be the Directors of Associates, is not maintainable.
JUDGMENT
VINEET SARAN, C.J. - The petitioner, Seashore Securities Limited (a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956) has, though filed this application assailing vires of the provisions of the Odisha Protection of Interests of Depositors (in Financial Establishments) Act, 2011 (for short ‘Act, 2011’) and the Odisha Protection of Interests of Depositors (in Financial Establishments) Rules, 2013 (for short ‘Rules, 2013’), but is in fact aggrieved by proceedings initiated against its seven directors, under the provisions of Act, 2011 and Rules, 2013.
2. The factual matrix of the case is that, on the basis of various petitions and information received, an enquiry was entrusted to the Superintendent of Police, Criminal Investigation Department (CID), Crime Branch (CB), Economic Offence Wing (EOW), Odisha, Bhubaneswar to verify the allegations that Seashore Group of Companies (out of which the petitioner company is one) are collecting public deposits to the tune of crores of rupees from members of general public by alluring them with high interest rate, etc. and promising to pay them heavy return. The company, after collecting huge amount of deposits from the members of general public, suddenly closed down their branches and their directors disappeared. After hue and cry, as well as protest from the public, the company settled some of the amount due to the depositors, but still large number of deposits were not returned to the depositors and misappropriated by the company. Consequentially, the company cheated many members of the general public.
3. It is alleged further that the company was accepting deposits and issuing preference shares with guaranteed monthly dividend of 2% for a period of six years, along with one life insurance policy from Tata AIG Life and one accidental insurance from Oriental Insurance Company, etc. But, the said company is not a listed company with Reserve Bank of India in any manner as a Non-Banking Financial Company (NBFC). Therefore, on 18.07.2012 an FIR bearing no.39 of 2012 was registered by the CID, CB (EOW), Odisha under Sections 420 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 4, 5 and 6 of Prize, Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978, on the basis of which, on 19.07.2012 an amount of Rs.19,89,444/- was seized by the CID, CB, Odisha, and also seizure was made in respect of various movable and improvable properties of the directors of the company on different dates up to 28.06.2013.
4. At this point of time, the Odisha Protection of Interests of Depositors (in Financial Establishments) Act, 2011 was brought into force on 17.08.2013 with the object of protecting the deposits made by the public in financial establishments. Subsequently, Odisha Protection of Interests of Depositors (in Financial Establishments) Rules, 2013 came into force on 24.09.2013. The Government of Odisha appointed Additional District Magistrate as the competent authority by virtue of notification no.31732 dated 10.10.2013. The Government of Odisha, on 02.12.2013, passed an ad interim order of attachment of the properties of the directors of the petitioner company and transferred the control over the properties to the competent authority, namely, Additional District Magistrate, Cuttack. The competent authority, on 28.12.2013, filed an application before the Designated Court, Cuttack with a prayer to make the ad interim order of attachment absolute and direct the competent authority to sell the attached property by public auction. Then, on 22.03.2014, CID, CB (EOW), Odisha submitted charge-sheet in connection with FIR No.39 of 2012. Accordingly, summonses were issued by the Designated Court on 23.04.2014 to the accused persons, pursuant to which the accused persons, who were directors of the company, appeared before the Designated Court on 09.05.2014.
5. When the matter was thus stood, the Supreme Court directed transfer of investigation of the case to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) a
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.