SC Suspends Punjab and Haryana High Court Order in Gurgaon Financial Fraud Case | Chandigarh News

CHANDIGARH: The Supreme Court suspended the order of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana prohibiting the police in Gurgaon from investigating a financial fraud in which the accused had raised the issue of territorial jurisdiction against the Haryana Police action to register FIR in Delhi-related case. The Supreme Court also stayed all other proceedings pending before the HC in this case.
“Until further orders of this court, there will be a stay of the execution of the contested interim order dated August 13, 2021, adopted by the High Court, except to the extent of the release of the accused and there will be a stay of all subsequent proceedings. in CRM-M-32887 of 2021 pending before the High Court ”, ordered the SC.
The division bench, comprising Judge S Abdul Nazeer and Judge AS Bopana of the SC, adopted these orders during the hearing of the Special Leave Application (SLP) filed by Haryana against three interim orders of the High Court. . In his orders dated August 13, HC ordered the state not to take any coercive action against the accused and suspended further investigation by the police.
A senior lawyer familiar with the case has informed that the Supreme Court has expressed serious concerns about how all of these orders comply with the Supreme Court ruling in a case called Neeharika Infrastructure Private Limited against the State of Maharashtra.
India’s Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who was appearing for Haryana, said: “Here, in its jurisdiction under Article 482 of the CrPC, the high court rejects the discredit by saying how did you recorded an offense, let the police commissioner file his personal affidavit file, how did you register an offense, let the Home Secretary file his personal affidavit.
He argued that the person who is arrested by the police, after being satisfied with the prima facie case, and after the Sessions Judge, being satisfied with denying the due bail, the court in a 482 jurisdiction grants provisional bail , which in principle, as a proposition is reprehensible. Seeking to stay on the order, Mehta argued that the orders made by the high court were extraordinary and very unusual. HC Judge Manoj Bajaj adopted the August 13 order after hearing a petition filed by a certain Santosh Mahalingam. The FIR in this case contains allegations relating to the non-payment of the loan to the plaintiff (PM Fincap Ltd) by the borrower’s trusts – Maharaji Educational Trust and Santosh Trust. The applicant and his parents are trustees of the trust.
According to him, the loan transactions started in 2009, and initially a loan of Rs 15 crore was disbursed by PM Fincap Ltd and against this until 2014 a sum of Rs 20 crore was paid by the borrowers, but in March 2015, another sum of Rs 35 crore was disbursed and against which a sum of Rs 25 crore was returned to the sister companies of PM Fincap Ltd for payments made in March 201. All transactions took place in Delhi, and other disputes between the parties are also pending in Delhi, including the complaint under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 filed by the creditor against the petitioners, as the checks delivered by the petitioners to clear the debt have been refused. The accused’s main plea before the HC was that the FIR could not have been registered against him in Gurgaon because the cause of action had arisen in Delhi.
Finance co had filed 3 SLPs:
In its ordinances, the magistracy Manoj Bajaj of the HC had also asked the State to justify the registration of the FIR. Besides the state, the complainant in the FIR, PM Fincap Ltd, had also filed three SLPs challenging all of the orders.
Previous French politician hails Vietnam's foreign policy
Next CPI-Based Inflation Stays At 8.4% In August Despite Soaring Food Prices

No Comment

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published.