$~

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

% Judgment reserved on: 24.07.2025

Judgment pronounced on: 21.11.2025

+ CO.APP. 23/2024 & CM APPL. 51379/2024 (for stay)

SERIOUS FRAUD INVESTIGATION OFFICE .....Appellant

Through: Mr. Amit Tiwari, CGSC, Ms. Ayushi Srivastava and Mr. Ayush Tanwar, Advocates.

Ms. Parul, SFIO and Mr. Sanjay Bose, Joint Director.

versus

ASSOTECH LIMITED IN LIQUIDATION & ANR.

.....Respondents

Through: Ms. Ruchi Sindhwani, Sr. Standing Counsel for the OL.

Mr. Rajshekhar Rao, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Rishi Awasthi and Mr. Piyush Vats for the Ex-Management of the Respondent/R-2.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR

J U D G M E N T

HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR, J.

CM APPL. 51381/2024 (for condonation of delay of 48 days in filing appeal)

1. By way of the present Application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, the Applicant/Appellant seeks condonation of the delay of 48 days in filing the present Appeal.

2. Issue notice. Notice is accepted by Ms. Ruchi Sindhwani, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the Official Liquidator1, as well as by Mr. Rishi Awasthi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Ex-Management of the Respondent Company.

3. Learned Counsels appearing for the Respondent have not opposed the present Application.

4. For the sufficient reasons stated in the application and the fact that the same is not opposed by the learned Counsels for the Respondents, the delay is condoned.

5. Accordingly, the present application stands disposed of.

CM APPL. 51382/2024 (for condonation of delay of 48 days in re-filing appeal)

6. By way of the present application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, the Applicant/Appellant seeks condonation of the delay of 48 days in re-filing the present appeal.

7. For the sufficient reasons stated in the application and the fact that the same is not opposed by the learned Counsels for the Respondents, the delay is condoned.

8. Accordingly, the present application stands disposed of.

CO.APP. 23/2024 & CM APPL. 51379/2024 (for stay)

9. The instant Appeal has been filed against the Judgment dated 23.04.2024, passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in Company Application 406/2024 (For clarification of order dated 04.04.2014) in Company Petition 357/2015 titled as ‘Manmohan Singh Bhalla vs. Assotech Limited’.

10. The short question raised in the present Appeal is whether the learned Single Judge of this Court, while exercising his jurisdiction in a company matter, could, having directed the initiation of an investigation into the affairs of a company by the Appellant/Serious Fraud Investigation Office2, by subsequent orders intedict the natural progression of such an Order of investigation, which is statutorily provided for, by passing the Order which is impugned herein.

11. The Appellant herein is aggrieved by the following portion of the Impugned Judgment:

“7. Hence, it is clarified that this Court vide order dated 04.04.2024 has not granted liberty to the SFIO to launch any prosecution against the Ex.-Management de hor the provisions of the Companies Act, 2013. The SFIO shall refrain from launching any prosecution against the Ex-Management/directors of the company in liquidation till such time this Court considers the report filed by the SFIO and passes appropriate directions thereupon.”

12. Issue notice. Notice is accepted by Ms. Ruchi Sindhwani, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the OL, as well as by Mr. Rishi Awasthi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Ex-Management of the Respondent Company.

13. With the consent of the learned Counsel appearing for the parties, the present Appeal was taken up for hearing and final disposal. In pursuance thereof, the same is being adjudicated and disposed of by the present Judgment.

14. At the outset, we note that the direction for investigation to the Appellant/SFIO came to be passed by this