Crl.M(Co.) 3/2008

Page 1 of 15

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+

Crl.M(Co.) 3/2008 and Co.Appl.577/2008, Co.Appl.602/2008

and Co.Appl.625/2008

Order reserved on: 22.09.2021

Date of decision : 30.09.2021

SONIA KHOSLA (THROUGH L.R.)

…… Petitioner

Through:

Mr.Salman Khurshid, Sr.

Advocate with Mr.Deepak

Khosla and Ms.Aadya Mishra,

Advocates

versus

VIKRAM BAKSHI & ORS.

..... Respondents

Through:

Mr. Jay Savla, Sr. Adv. with

Mr.Anand Mohan Mishra,

Advocate for respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE ANU MALHOTRA

ORDER

ANU MALHOTRA, J.

1.

The

petitioner,

now

represented

through

her

Legal

Representative, vide this petition has sought that the Court proceeds

under Section 340 of the Cr.P.C., 1973, against the prospective

accused without notice to them.

2.

Vide order dated 15.2.2010 it was observed vide para 8 thereof

to the effect:

2021:DHC:3116

Crl.M(Co.) 3/2008

Page 2 of 15

weeks.”

3.

The inquiry report of the Registrar Vigilance is indicated to

have been received as observed vide order dated 2.7.2010.

4.

Vide order dated 16.8.2010 it was observed to the effect:

“+CO.Appln.

No.1299/2010

in

Crl.M.(CO.)

No.3/2008

2021:DHC:3116

Crl.M(Co.) 3/2008

Page 3 of 15

Supreme Court in Iqbal Singh Marwah vs. Meenakshi

Marwah (2005) 4 SCC 370 wherein it was observed

2021:DHC:3116

Crl.M(Co.) 3/2008

Page 4 of 15

2021:DHC:3116

Crl.M(Co.) 3/2008

Page 5 of 15

consideration of affidavits as well as for arguments”

2021:DHC:3116

Crl.M(Co.) 3/2008

Page 6 of 15

5.

Vide order dated 24.4.2012 in LPA No. 16/2012 of the Hon’ble

Division Bench of this Court all proceedings pending between the

parties had been stayed.

6.

Vide order dated 8.5.2014 of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in

SLP (Crl.) No.6873/2010 between the parties herein vide paragraphs

21 to 24 it was observed to the effect:

2021:DHC:3116

Crl.M(Co.) 3/2008

Page 7 of 15

receiving a copy of this order. Since, it is the CLB

which will be deciding the application under Section

340 Cr. PC filed by Ms. Sonia Khosla in the CLB,

High Court need not proceed further with the

Criminal Misc. (Co.). No. 3 of 2008. Likewise the

2021:DHC:3116

Crl.M(Co.) 3/2008

Page 8 of 15

such application. No costs.”

7.

Vide the judgment dated 3.12.2018, CA No. 1089/2018 filed in

the present petition Crl.M.(Co.) 3/2008 was disposed of observing to

the effect vide paragraphs 3 to 18 thereof to the effect:

“13. A perusal of the order of the Supreme Court

dated 08.05.2014 would show that the Supreme Court

has specifically directed that the High Court need not

proceed further with the present Crl.M (CO.) 3/2008.

(emphasis supplied)

Court dated 8.5.2014 in SLP (Crl.) No.6873/2010 titled

2021:DHC:3116

Crl.M(Co.) 3/2008

Page 9 of 15

as Vikram Bakshi & Ors. vs. Sonia Khosla (Dead) By

LRs. Yet he submits that this court would continue to

Tayabbhai M.Bagasarwalla and another vs. Hind

Rubber Industries Pvt. Ltd., AIR 1997 SCC 1240. He

is also placed on judgment of this Court in Ram Phal

and Ors. vs. B.S.Bhalla and Ors., 112(2004) DLT 193

and judgment of the Supreme Court in Subramanian

Swamy vs. Arun Shourie, (2014) 12 SCC 344.

Court in Vikram Bakshi & Ors. vs. Sonia Khosla

(dead) By LRs being SLP (Criminal) 6873/2010 dated

2021:DHC:3116

Crl.M(Co.) 3/2008

Page 10 of 15

Court also become otiose.”

17. In my opinion, it is manifest from a reading of the

above orders of the Supreme Court that this petition is

not to be heard. Disputes raised by the petitioner are to

be

adjudicated

upon

by

the

Company

Law

Board/NCLT. The order of the Supreme Court dated

8.5.2014 supersedes the orders and directions passed

by this court on 16.8.2010. The said order dated

16.08.2010 was passed to aid in adjudicating this

petition. As the petition itself does not survive in this

court to be adjudicated, the respondents were not

require