Neeharika Infrastructure Private Limited vs State of Maharashtra

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2021 Supreme(SC) 199

D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, M. R. SHAH, SANJIV KHANNA
Neeharika Infrastructure Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. K.V. Vishwanathan, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Arunabh Chowdhury, Advocate, Mr. Vaibhav Tomar Advocate, Mr. Abhay Jadeja, Advocate, Ms. Barnalli Chowdhury, Advocate, Mr. Varun Satiya, Advocate, Mr. Karma Dorji, Advocate, Mr. Dechan W. Lachungpa, Advocate, Mrs. Pragya Baghel, Advocate
For the Respondent:Mr. Sachin Patil, Advocate, Mr. Rahul Chitnis, Advocate, Mr. Aaditya A. Pande, Advocate, Mr. Geo Joseph, Advocate, Mr. Diljeet Ahluwalia, Advocate, Mr. Malak Manish Bhatt, Advocate, Ms. Neeha Nagpal, Advocate

Judgement Key Points

Understood. Please provide the legal document content (inside tags or similar) and your specific question or task (e.g., summarize key terms, identify clauses, extract obligations), and I'll analyze it accordingly using the specified referencing format.

JUDGMENT :

M.R. SHAH, J.

1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned interim order dated 28.09.2020 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Writ Petition (ST) No. 2306 of 2020, by which, in an application filed by private respondent nos. 2 to 4 herein (hereinafter referred to as the 'original accused') under Article 226 of the Constitution of India r/w Section 482 Cr.P.C. with a prayer to quash the criminal proceedings being FIR No. 367/2019 dated 19.09.2019, the High Court has directed that "no coercive measures shall be adopted" against the original accused in respect of the said FIR, the original complainant has preferred the present appeal.

2. That the appellant herein has lodged an FIR against respondent nos. 2 to 4 herein - original accused at Worli Police Station, Mumbai for the offences under Sections 406, 420, 465, 468, 471 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code. That the allegations against the original accused pertain to forgery and fabrication of Board Resolution and the fraudulent sale of a valuable property Naziribagh Palace ad-measuring 111,882 sq. ft. belonging to the appellant company to one M/s Irish Hospitality Pvt. Ltd.

2.1 A

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2021 Supreme(SC) 199

D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, M. R. SHAH, SANJIV KHANNANeeharika Infrastructure Private Limited – AppellantVersusState of Maharashtra – Respondent

D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, M. R. SHAH, SANJIV KHANNA
Neeharika Infrastructure Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent