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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Bom) 351857

Rajesh Shantilal Adani – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent


Order:

By these petitions, the petitioners (accused Nos.8, 9, and

10) seek to challenge the orders dated 1 November 2019

passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Mumbai, in Criminal

Revision Applications No.248 of 2017 and 1496 of 2015,

whereby the orders dated 9 May 2014 and 7 October 2015

passed by the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 38th

Court, Ballard Pier, Mumbai, in CC No.10/SW/2012,

discharging the petitioners for the offences punishable under

Sections 420 read with 120B of the Indian Penal Code (‘IPC’)

were set aside and the trial Court was directed to follow the

procedure contemplated under Sections 244 and 245 of the

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC).

2. Based on the authorisation granted by the Central

Government under Section 621(1) of the Companies Act, 1956

(‘1956 Act’), as per the Notification dated 4 December 2008

issued by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs read with the office

order dated 16 January 2012, a complaint was filed on 26 April

2012 by the Union of India through the Senior Assistant

Director (Investigation) of the Serious Fraud Investigation

Office (‘SFIO’) in the Court of Additional Chief Metropolitan

Magistrate, 38th Court, Ballard P

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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top