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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 8784

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
M.NAGAPRASANNA
MR. SYED SAMEER AHMED – Appellant
Versus
STATE BY – Respondent


ORAL ORDER

The petitioner is before this Court calling in question the proceedings in C.C.No.6043/2023 registered for offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ('the IPC' for short).

2. Heard Sri. Kiran S. Javali, learned Senior counsel along with Sri. Mohamed Zulfikhar Ahamed, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner; Sri. B.N. Jagadeesha, learned Additional Special Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent No.1/State and Sri. Akash B. Shetty, learned counsel appearing for the complainant/respondent No.2.

3. The facts adumbrated are as follows:

Respondent No.2 is the complainant. The petitioner is accused No.1. Petitioner is said to be a partner in one M/s. Provenio Capital Advisors, a company registered under the Companies Act. The said company is said to have arranged a conference, wherein it did project that it would get loans against Foreign Direct Investments (FDI) with lesser rate of interest. One such person, who attended the said conference was the complainant. The complainant was made known that if he would part with the processing fee of Rs.38,00,000/-, he would get Rs.25/-crores with lesser amount of interest. This

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