9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (6) TMI 1104X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... agreements with the broadcasters to distribute the channels of the broadcasters in various platforms like Analog Digital Cable and Direct To Home (DTH). It is stated by the petitioner that on 9.10.2011, the Central Bureau of Investigation (in short, "CBI"), has registered a First Information Report in RC-DAI-2011(A)-0022 against individuals and companies and also against other unknown officials/persons. The respondent viz. Enforcement Directorate, New Delhi, has also registered a case in ECIR/05/DZ/2012 dated 7.2.2012, for the purpose of investigating the offences of money-laundering under the provisions of the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002 - Central Act 15 of 2003 (in short, "PMLA") against the persons mentioned in the FIR registered by the CBI. The petitioner would further state that the case registered by the CBI, culminated in a charge sheet in RC-DAI2011(a)-0022 dated 29.8.2014, before the Designated Court of Special Judge for CBI Cases, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi. It is the specific case of the petitioner that it has neither been arraigned as an accused, nor is there any allegation about it's involvement in the aforesaid cases registered by the CBI and the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re called in the Court, and on that date, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Directorate of Enforcement, made a submission that since the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeal No.10660 of 2010 (CENTER FOR PIL AND OTHERS V. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS), is monitoring the investigation pertaining to 2G Spectrum Case and Aircel Maxis Case (the present subject matter) and also passed an order that "no Court shall pass any order which may, in any manner, impede the investigation being carried out by the CBI and the Directorate of Enforcement", and this Court cannot decide these writ petitions. 6. In response to the said submission, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners, has invited the attention of this Court to the affidavits filed by Mr.Vittal Sampathkumaran, the Managing Director of the petitioner in W.P.No.12464/2015, and Mr.M.Jyothibasu, the Authorised Signatory of the petitioner in W.P.No.12664/2015, and would submit that since an undertaking has been given that the respective petitioner will not alienate, encumber in any manner or create any charge with respect to the properties mentioned therein, there cannot be any impediment in vacati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s, that in the light of the two affidavits filed in these writ petitions, wherein an undertaking has been given not to alienate, create encumbrance or do other things, which may affect the interest of the respondent, the Provisional Orders of Attachment insofar as the said properties, may be vacated and appropriate orders be passed. 10. Per contra, Mr.G.Rajagopalan, learned Additional Solicitor General of India, assisted by Mr.Su.Srinivasan, learned Assistant Solicitor General of India, appearing for the respondent, made the following submissions:- (i) The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in CivilAppeal No.10660 of 2010, is monitoring the investigation pertaining to 2G Spectrum Case, Aircel Maxis Case (subject matter of these writ petitions) and Additional Spectrum Case and since it is monitoring the investigation of 2G Spectrum Case, passed an order of direction that no Court shall pass any order which may, in any manner, impede the investigation being carried out by the Central Bureau of Investigation and the Directorate of Enforcement and hence, this Court cannot pass orders on the merits of the case. (ii) Once the property is provisionally attached, an adjudication has t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Court of India in the said interim order dated 16.12.2010, has taken note of the report of the Central Vigilance Commission and the report of the Comptroller and Audit General of India, prima facie found serious irregularities in the grant of licences to 122 applicants, majority of whom are said to be ineligible, the blatant violation of the terms and conditions of licences, which resulted in huge loss to the public exchequer running into several thousand crores and directions were given to the CBI to probe how licences were granted to large number of ineligible persons and why the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India and the Department of Telecommunication did not take action against those licensees who sold their stakes and equities for many thousand crores and also against those who failed to fulfill roll out obligations and comply with other conditions of licence. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, among other things, has also granted liberty to the Directorate of Enforcement and Income Tax Department to continue with their investigation without any hindrance or interference by any one. (ii) The said Civil Appeal was listed on 10.2.2011, and the Hon'ble Supreme Cour ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nwhile, the CBI shall make an endeavour to complete the investigation, as far as possible in RC DAI 2011 A 0022. The Court Masters are directed to re-seal the envelopes. The needful has been done. Shri Venugopal, learned senior counsel for the CBI made an oral request for modification of the direction contained in order dated 2.2.2012 to facilitate submission of the progress report directly by the CBI to the Court with copies to the Central Vigilance Commission and Enforcement Directorate so that the latter may directly send comments to this Court and the reports along with the comments of the Central Vigilance Commission and Enforcement Directorate can be considered by the Court at the same time. The request made by Shri Venugopal is accepted and in modification of order dated 2.2.2012 it is directed that henceforth CBI shall directly file reports in this Court with copies to the Central Vigilance Commission and Enforcement Directorate. The Central Vigilance Commission and Enforcement Directorate shall send their comments/observations to the Court within two weeks of the receipt of the copies of the report from the CBI. Shri Venugopal, learned senior counsel appearing for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
