Rajiv Kirtibhai Kothari vs Serious Fraud Investigation Office on 20 October, 2020

[Cites 2, Cited by 1]

Gujarat High Court

Rajiv Kirtibhai Kothari vs Serious Fraud Investigation Office on 20 October, 2020

Bench: A. P. Thaker

       R/SCR.A/6047/2020                                 ORDER



         IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

        R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 6047 of 2020
==========================================================
                     RAJIV KIRTIBHAI KOTHARI
                              Versus
               SERIOUS FRAUD INVESTIGATION OFFICE
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. NIRUPAM NANAVATY, SR. ADVOCATE WITH YUVRAJ G
THAKORE(7785) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MS. MOXA THAKKAR, APP (2) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================

 CORAM: HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A. P. THAKER

                           Date : 20/10/2020

                            ORAL ORDER

1. Heard Mr. Nirupam Nanavaty, learned Senior Counsel with Mr.Yuvraj Thakore, learned advocate for the applicant and Ms. Moxa Thakkar, learned APP for the respondent State through Videoconferencing.

2. Mr. Nanavaty, learned Senior Counsel has, while going to the contention made in the FIR itself, submitted that the present applicant is not involved in the said offence in any manner and he has not issued any Money as alleged. He has submitted that there is an allegation of transfer of tenancy right and thereafter it was being purchased by the Company for more than 2 crores. He has also submitted that the present applicant has nothing to do with the allegation of transfer of tenancy right. He has also submitted that Special Court has not considered this aspect and has issued Nonbailable warrant. He has further submitted that the present applicant has remained present for interrogation before the concerned authority and his statement has been recorded by the Page 1 of 2 Downloaded on : Tue Oct 20 20:36:08 IST 2020 R/SCR.A/6047/2020 ORDER authority. He has submitted that provisions of Section 447 of the Companies Act r/w. Section 212 of the Companies Act are not applicable. Learned Sr. Counsel has submitted that protection be granted to the applicant as he is not involved in the offence as alleged by the complainant.

3. Learned APP has submitted that the Respondent No.2 State is noncontesting party and Respondent No.1 is the contesting party.

4. Considering the submissions made by learned advocate as well as submissions made in the affidavit itself and the order passed by learned Special Court dated 17.3.2020, it primafacie appears that the issue requires consideration.

5. Rule returnable on 26.11.2020. Learned APP waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of respondent State.

6. Let Respondent No.1 be served through usual mode of service.

7. In the meanwhile, impugned order of issuance of Non bailable warrant against the present applicant by the Special Court dated 17.3.2020, qua the present applicant, is hereby stayed.

(DR. A. P. THAKER, J) saj/ cmk Page 2 of 2 Downloaded on : Tue Oct 20 20:36:08 IST 2020

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Gujarat High Court