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

2021 Supreme(P&H) 1623

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
ARUN KUMAR TYAGI, J.
Vijay Shukla – Appellant
Versus
Serious Fraud Investigation Officer – Respondent
CRM-M-24870-2020
Decided on : 30-04-2021

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Vikram Chaudhri, Senior Advocate with Mr. Gautam Avasthi, Advocate and Mr. Rahil Mahajan, Advocate
For the Respondent: Mr. Satya Pal Jain, Mr. Alok Jain, Senior Panel

Headnote:

JUDGMENT : ARUN KUMAR TYAGI, J. 1. The petitioner has filed the present (first) petition under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'the Cr.P.C.) for grant of anticipatory bail in complaint case No.3 of 2019 CNR No.HRGR01-007022-2019 (CIS No.COMA/5/2019) dated 18.05.2019 titled as 'Serious Fraud Investigation Office Vs. Adarsh Buildestate Limited and others' in which the petitioner has been summoned under Sections 58A, 211(7), 227 and 628 of the Companies Act, 1956, Sections 74(3), 147, 447 and 448 of the Companies Act, 2013 and Section 477A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner was director of Fracton Technologies Pvt. Ltd., one of the above said 70 CUIs of AGCL, from 15.06.2011 to 14.08.2018 and was managing affairs thereof during the said period. Fracton Technologies Pvt. Ltd., using the above modus operandi, obtained loan to the tune of Rs.14.75 crores from ACCSL as principal amount from financial year 2012-13 to financial year 2016- 17 during the period when the petitioner was one of the Directors and managing affairs thereof.

Finding of the Court:

The petitioner has prima facie signed and filed financial statements containing false information knowing it to be false and omitting material information as to material facts knowing it to be material and to have thereby committed offence under Section 448 punishable under Section 447 of the Companies Act, 2013 to which the rigors of twin conditions laid down in Section 212 (6) (ii) of the Companies Act, 2013 are applicable.

Issues: Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that the petitioner is not entitled to anticipatory bail. The Court observed that the petitioner has prima facie signed and filed financial statements containing false information knowing it to be false and omitting material information as to material facts knowing it to be material and to have thereby committed offence under Section 448 punishable under Section 447 of the Companies Act, 2013 to which the rigors of twin conditions laid down in Section 212 (6) (ii) of the Companies Act, 2013 are applicable. The Court further observed that the petitioner does not have any criminal antecedents, the second condition be considered to be satisfied that the petitioner is not likely to commit any offence under the Companies Act, 2013 after his release on bail. Even otherwise, the case involves serious economic offences affecting large number of individuals from low and middle income groups and also adversely affecting the national economy.

Final Decision: The petition for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner is hereby dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

ARUN KUMAR TYAGI, J.

1. The petitioner has filed the present (first) petition under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'the Cr.P.C.) for grant of anticipatory bail in complaint case No.3 of 2019 CNR No.HRGR01-007022-2019 (CIS No.COMA/5/2019) dated 18.05.2019 titled as 'Serious Fraud Investigation Office Vs. Adarsh Buildestate Limited and others' in which the petitioner has been summoned under Sections 58A, 211(7), 227 and 628 of the Companies Act, 1956, Sections 74(3), 147, 447 and 448 of the Companies Act, 2013 and Section 477A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

2. Briefly stated, the facts as mentioned in the above-referred complaint relevant for disposal of the present petition are that one Multi State Credit Co-operative Society was got registered under the Multi State Co-operative Societies Act, 2002 by Mukesh Modi and his family members in the name of Adarsh Credit Co-operative Society Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as ACCSL). ACCSL accepted deposits from its members, who were marginally low to middle income group individuals. ACCSL had more than 800 branches, about 20 lakh members, 3.7 lakh advisors/agents and outstanding deposit liability of Rs. 9253/- crores payable to the investors/members as on 31.05.2018. After collecting money from the public, Mukesh Modi and his family members and associates created a large number of Companies under the aegis of Adarsh Group of Companies Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as AGCL) with their associates and relatives as the Directors. The money deposited with ACCSL was allegedly siphoned off through the Companies created under the aegis of the AGCL. When the matter came to knowledge of the Central Government, the Central Government, through Ministry of Corporate Affairs vide orders dated 20.06.2018 and 25.02.2019 ordered investigation into the affairs of the said companies, through the Serious Fraud Investigation Office (hereinafter referred to as SFIO). During investigation it was found that the group of 126 companies (hereinafter referred to as CUIs) was managed and controlled by Mr. Mukesh Modi, his family members and associates. 70 out of the above said 126 CUIs had fraudulently/illegally obtained loan from ACCSL to the tune of Rs. 1700/- crores. Amount of Rs. 4120/- crores was outstanding against said loans as on 31.03.2018. Section 25 of the Multi-State Cooperative Societies Act, 2002 did not allow a company to be a member of Credit Co-operative Society. Amendment of the bye-laws of ACCSL for making companies eligible for membership of ACCSL was rejected by the Central Registrar vide order dated 19.04.2012. The petitioner was director of Fracton Technologies Pvt. Ltd., one of the above said 70 CUIs, from 15.06.2011 to 14.08.2018 and was managing affairs thereof during the said period. Fracton Technologies Pvt. Ltd. obtained loan to the tune of Rs.14.75/- crores from ACCSL from financial year 2012-13 to financial year 2016-17 and part of the above said loan secured during enforcement of the Companies Act, 1956 remained unpaid upon commencement of the Companies Act, 2013. On completion of the investigation and after taking necessary permissions from the Central Government, SFIO presented the investigation report in the form of statutory Complaint before the Special Court at Gurugram on 18.5.2019. In the Complaint/ report the petitioner is arrayed as accused at Sr.No.149 and Fracton Technologies Pvt. Ltd. is arrayed as accused at Sr. No.65. On filing of the complaint by the SFIO, learned Sessions Judge, Gurugram vide order dated 03.06.2019 summoned the CUIs and other individuals including the petitioner, under various provisions of the Companies Act, 1956, the Companies Act, 2013 and the Indian Penal Code, 1860 as mentioned therein.

3. The petition has been opposed by the respondent-Serious Fraud Investigation Office in terms of reply dated 17.09.2

                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