9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 1058X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d also in all other aspects. 2. The said order dated 10.08.2011 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh inter alia stated as 'prima facie that it emerges from the record forming part of the writ petitions including pleadings of the parties that from May, 2004 onwards, respondent No. 52 (Jagan Mohan Reddy) floated number of companies wherein Quid Pro Quo investments have been made out of the benefits received by the investors / beneficiaries from the decisions of the State Government in various forms like SEZ's irrigation contracts, relaxation / permission for real estate ventures, mines etc. besides payment of huge premium amounts paid in the shares and invested in the companies by such beneficiaries and the money so paid is nothing but corrupt money attracting Section 3 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. 3. As per the Order Dated 10.08.2011 of the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad, in Writ Petition Nos.794 & 6604 of 2011, Central Bureau of Investigation, ACB, Hyderabad, registered a case vide RC.19(A)/2011-CBI-HYD on 17.08.2011 under Section 120-B, read with Section 420, Section 409 & Section 477-A of Indian Penal Code, 1860 &Section 13(2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mining lease for limestone in favour of M/s WalchandTandur Cement Company Ltd. Vide G.O.Ms.No.76 dated 26.02.2009 and change of name of Company from M/s WalchandTandur Cement Company Ltd. To M/s Penna Cement Company Ltd. Vide G.O.Ms.No.25. d) Grant of Permission for Hotel Construction at Banjara Hills and relaxations thereon. 8. Another allegation is that Mr. P. Pratap Reddy, inter alia, invested Rs. 45 Cr. through his group company: M/s PR Energy Holdings Pvt Ltd, into M/s Jagati Publications Ltd. as quid pro quo to alleged favors received from GOAP. As far as this investment is concerned, the same is not denied but as per appellants, it was a genuine investment. 9. It is further alleged that M/s Jagati Publications has advanced a sum of Rs. 11,54,87,968/- and Rs. 17,13,05,454 to M/s Janani Infrastructure Pvt Ltd. and M/s Indira Television Pvt Ltd. respectively from the monies received from M/s PR Energy Holdings Pvt Ltd. Re: Investment of Rs. 23 Cr. by M/s PR Energy Holdings Pvt Ltd into M/s Carmel Asia Holdings Pvt Ltd. 10. The allegations are also that Mr. P. Pratap Reddy, inter alia, invested Rs. 23 Cr. through his group company: M/s PR Energy Holdings Pvt Ltd, into M/s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ommenced its operations would evidently show the market capabilities of M/s Jagati Publications Ltd. Many other persons, against whom no allegations exists also invested in M/s Jagati Publications Ltd. at premium of Rs. 350 per share but no actions are taken by the CBI and ED. It is alleged that about 60 investors have made the investment in the companies but CBI and ED have initiated the action only against few investors which is clear case of discrimination. Counsel for the respondent has not denied the said fact but it was stated by him that in many of the cases, actions have taken against the investors where they have taken benefits from the Government. 16. It is also argued on behalf of the appellants that all the investments/advances by M/s Carmel Asia Holdings Pvt Ltd, and M/s Jagati Publications Ltd., to M/s Janani Infrastructure Pvt Ltd. and M/s Indira Television Pvt Ltd. are genuine investments made in course of bona fide commercial transactions. 17. In the impugned order, the following conclusion has been arrived: - On a thorough perusal of the PAO, Complaint, the FIR and the Charge Sheet, the investigation conducted by the ED and the statements recorded u/s 50 of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a pecuniary advantage as a result of, or in connection with, conduct." 20. From the entire gamut of the matter and material placed on record, it appears to us that the allegation of bribe and cheating are yet to be considered by the Special Court. It is yet to be examined after trial as to whether any criminality is involved or not. There is no denial on the part of the appellants that the said investments were made. 21. As regards the allegation that Mr. P. Pratap Reddy, inter alia, invested Rs. 45 Cr. through his group company: M/s PR Energy Holdings Pvt Ltd, into M/s Jagati Publications Ltd. as quid pro quo to alleged favours received from GOAP; as far as investment part is concerned, the same is not denied but as per appellants, it was a genuine investment. 22. There are versions against the version of the respondent who stated that the investors have obtained favour from Government of Andhra Pradesh. The said aspect has to be determined at the time of trial as to whether despite of attachment of land of Government of Andhra Pradesh it was a genuine investment. In view of facts involved in the present appeals the appellants have not discharged their burden fully, thus benefi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
