Patna High Court - Orders
Abhinandan Kumar Suman vs The State Of Bihar And Ors on 4 September, 2019
Bench: Chakradhari Sharan Singh, S. Kumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No.632 of 2013
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7190 of 2012
======================================================
Abhinandan Kumar Suman ... ... Appellant
Versus
The State Of Bihar and Ors ... ... Respondents
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant :
For the Respondent UoI : Mr. S. D. Sanjay, Additional Solicitor General
Mr. Kumar Priya Ranjan, C.G.C.
For the Respondent State : Mr. Prabhakar Jha, G.P.-27
Mr. Mukund Mohan Jha, AC to GP-27
For Respondent No. 6 : Mr. Ranjan Kumar Srivastava, Advocate
For Respondent No. 7 : Mr. Dhridyuti Kumar Verma, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN
SINGH
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN
SINGH)
44 04-09-2019Regard being had to the previous order, dated 31.07.2019, passed in this Case; Mr. S.D. Sanjay, learned Additional Solicitor General for India, appearing for Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO) with Mr. Kumar Priya Ranjan, learned Central Government Counsel, has drawn my attention to a letter, dated 20.08.2019, issued under the signature of Assistant Director, Government of India, Ministry of Corporate Affairs, addressed to the Director, SFIO, New Delhi.
The contents of the letter have significance, which has apparently been issued in the light of investigation report of the SFIO, Ministry of Corporate Affairs, New Delhi, relevant Patna High Court L.P.A No.632 of 2013(44) dt.04-09-2019 2/5 portion of which is being quoted hereinbelow : -
"Sub: Investigation into the affairs of Mangalam Homes (India) Private Limited (MHIPL) and Anand Homes Private Limited (AHPL). :-Reg.
Sir, I am directed to refer to the subject cited above and to convey the instructions of the Ministry for necessary action at your end as under :
Sr. Nature of Charges/Violations Action to be taken No.
1. Cheating and criminal conspiracy by the SFIO is authorized directors of MHIPL and AHPL to induce the to initiate the public to deliver money through advance proceedings as against flat booking and multiple selling of proposed.
same flats of saraswati niketan. Violation has been pointed out U/s 420 and Sec 406, 418, 416 r/w 419 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code 1860.
2. Financial statements for the years 2014-15 to SFIO is authorized 2017-18 of AHPL not showing true and fair to initiate the view of affairs of company. Violation has been proceedings as pointed out u/s Section 129 and 448 r/w 447 of proposed. Companies Act, 2013.
3. Financial statements for the years 2006-07 to SFIO is authorized 2013-14 of AHPL not showing true and fair to initiate the view of affairs of company. Violation has been proceedings as pointed out u/s Section 211 r/w 628 of proposed. Companies Act, 1956.
4. Financial statements for the years 2009-10 to SFIO is authorized 2011-12 of MHIPL not showing true and fair to initiate the view of affairs of company. Violation has been proceedings as pointed out u/s Section 211 r/w 628 of proposed. Companies Act, 1956.
5. Abuse of position, siphoning of company funds SFIO is authorized for personal gains by the directors of AHPL. to initiate the Violation has been pointed out u/s 447 of proceedings as Companies Act, 2013. proposed.
6. Abuse of position, siphoning of company funds SFIO is authorized for personal gains by the directors of MHIPL. to initiate the Violation has been pointed out u/s 447 of proceedings as Companies Act, 2013. proposed.
7. Unauthorized opening and operating of bank SFIO is authorized Patna High Court L.P.A No.632 of 2013(44) dt.04-09-2019 3/5 account by false representation by Sarwar to initiate the Najmi, director of MHIPL. Violation has been proceedings as pointed out under Sec 416 r/w 419, 420 of proposed. Indian Penal Code.
8. Misrepresentation of Facts and Audited SFIO is authorized financial statements not showing true and fair to initiate the view of the affairs of AHPL. Violation has proceedings as been pointed of Sec 227 r/w Sec 233 of proposed. Companies Act, 1956.
9. Misrepresentation of Facts and Audited SFIO is authorized financial statements not showing true and fair to initiate the view of the affairs of MHIPL. Violation has proceedings as been pointed of Sec 227 r/w Sec 233 and sec proposed. 628 of Companies Act, 1956.
10. False statement before the inspectors. Violation SFIO is authorized has been pointed out of Sec 449 of the to initiate the Companies Act, 2013. proceedings as proposed.
11. Non-appearance of the directors of MHIPL SFIO is authorized before the inspectors of SFIO against the to initiate the summons issued by the inspectors. Violation proceedings as has been pointed of Sec 217 of Companies Act proposed. 2013.
2. SFIO is directed to share the investigation report, along with specific references with respect to issue to be examined, with Income-tax authorities, Enforcement Directorate, Service Tax authorities and Central Bureau of Investigation for taking necessary actions. Besides this SFIO to share its report with o/o DGoCA.
3. SFIO is directed to make a formal complaint to ICAI against auditors Stayam Kumar Jha & Lalit Narayan Jha giving specific instances of role of aforesaid auditors in the matter.
4. SFIO is authorized to initiate winding up proceedings u/s 271 of Companies Act, 2013 as SFIO is already seized of the matter and is in complete knowhow of the facts related to the case, after following due procedure as laid down Patna High Court L.P.A No.632 of 2013(44) dt.04-09-2019 4/5 under Companies Act, 2013.
5. You are further directed to submit Action Taken Report on the above instructions within 15 days hereof.
6. This issues with the approval of the Competent Authority."
A 5th supplementary counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of SFIO stating that the Ministry of Corporate Affairs has granted sanction for prosecution based on investigation conducted by the SFIO, Regional Office, Kolkata, followed by a report. Mr. S.D. Sanjay submits that prompt steps shall be taken for lodging of case based on the investigation report of the SFIO.
A copy of the investigation report of the SFIO has been produced before this Court in sealed cover. We have gone through the said report. There are six specific recommendations made by the SFIO, as is evident from the said report. In the light of the recommendation, the steps have been suggested to be taken by the Income-tax authorities, Enforcement Directorate, Service Tax authorities and Central Bureau of Investigation.
Seemingly, it is in the background of the said recommendation that the SFIO has been directed by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs to share the investigation report with the Income-tax authorities, Enforcement Directorate, Service Tax authorities Patna High Court L.P.A No.632 of 2013(44) dt.04-09-2019 5/5 and Central Bureau of Investigation for taking necessary actions.
We would like to know whether the direction to the SFIO by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs vide its letter dated 20.08.2019, as mentioned in paragraph 2 of the said letter, has been complied with or not, by sharing the investigation report with the departments mentioned therein.
List this case on 18.09.2019, when the SFIO will be required to file an affidavit stating whether the direction as contained in paragraph 2 of the letter dated 20.08.2019 (supra) has been complied with or not. The Court expects learned Additional Solicitor General for India to seek instructions as to within what time the complaint shall be filed, after sanction having already been obtained by the Central Government and further, whether the Central Bureau of Investigation intends to register a case in the light of recommendation made by SFIO.
List this case on 18.09.2019.
(Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J) (S. Kumar, J) Pawan/-
U