9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (9) TMI 847X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion of embezzled funds into private investments in the name of the members of family, and charging exorbitant fees and accumulating funds in fixed deposits and the same allegations could be seen in the complaint dated September 29, 2016, sub-mitted by the first petitioner on which the FIR No. 22 of 2016 was came to be registered. It is a fact that the petitioners herein are the members of the company and since they satisfy the threshold limit of qualification for filing a petition under sections 213 and 241 of the Act, have filed the present petition. However, whereas the law requires them to show good reasons for seeking investigation supported by such evidence as may be necessary , they have relied only on the complaint filed in FIR No. 22 of 2016 which is already pending before the police authorities for investigation. At the time of filing the instant petition the petitioners have not filed any documents in support of their case and allegation/averments made in the company petition. Learned counsel for the respondents rightly pointed out that the petitioners have not filed any documents in support of invoking the provisions of sections 213 and 241 of the Act, 2013. In vi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es of OM International which has operations in 105 countries and the entire operation in those countries are bound by the Joint Ministries Agreement which was registered or filed with International Court of Justice in Canada. The said trust was registered in Mumbai under Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950 in the year 1972, and subsequently the headquarters was moved to Hyderabad in the year 1989. (d) The initial trustees either voluntarily resigned or were forced to leave the trust, following which the second respondent took over the management of the organization in 1987 and assumed the position of the National Director. Having gained total control of the organization, the second respondent along with few key trustees started incorporating, making, taking over various trusts, societies and organizations such as OM Books India Foundation, OM Books P. Ltd. company, Operation Mercy India Foundations, Mercy Community Development Foundation, Good Shep herd Community society (also known as Good Shepherd Community Church), International Bible Society, All India Christian Council and Day Spring Enterprises of India, etc., under the guise of dividing work. (e) The second respondent was su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ncorporated private limited companies for the purpose of hiding/covering financial irregularities in the guise of bona fide operations. It is also the practice of giving contracts to the friends of second respondent and his family members without inviting competitive quotations or tenders. (j) The second respondent purchased the Holy Bible books from Bible Society of India for free distribution amongst the new believers, whereas the same was sold to book shops and certain individual and he has embezzled an amount to the tune of ₹ 80 lakhs. OM India raised huge funds in various countries towards tsunami relief, but a significant portion of money to the tune of ₹ 4 to 5 crores were embezzled by the second respondent by creating fake, fabricated and pseudonymous beneficiaries. (k) One of the properties of the company situated at Jubilee Hills was sold without the permission of the Collector, Hyderabad and significant amount of sale proceeds was received in cash and not accounted in the company books. (l) The respondents are having three or four different accounts in India, UK, USA and other countries. The foreign contributions shall be regulated as per the FERA/FE ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... alities and on several occasions the funds were released on fictitious bills. He had also appointed a former Inspector General of Police to protect himself from any police action or enforcement agencies. (p) The petitioners after exhausting all available options, brought the matter to the notice of the hon'ble Home Minister of Telangana on December 8, 2015. He has forwarded the complaint to the DGP of Telangana with instructions to take appropriate action. After examination of the complaint, the police authorities have registered a FIR vide Crime No. 22 of 2016, dated September 29, 2016. When the investigation was going on, the respondents approached the hon'ble High Court through a petition in W. P. No. 40742 of 2016 to quash the FIR and stall the investigation. The hon'ble High Court dismissed the said writ petition vide its order dated April 3, 2017. The respondents who are accused in the FIR approached the Metropolitan Sessions Judge and obtained bail on April 28, 2017. The respondents have also filed a SLP and the hon'ble Supreme Court dis missed the SLP and directed the authorities to conclude the investigation expeditiously. (q) That an anonymous compla ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... compliant was registered in FIR No. 350 of 2012 on August 24, 2012 and the police authorities have investigated the complaint and filed a final report on October 28, 2013, closing the case for lack of evidences. No protest petition was filed by the said Mr. K. Ratnakar or any other person against the closure of FIR No. 350 of 2012. The said Mr. K. Ratnakar filed one more complaint registered in FIR No. 384 of 2012 on the allegation that the second respondent and others threatened him and forcibly took his resignation on May 3, 2012. After investigation the said FIR was also closed due to lack of evidences. (d) The first petitioner filed another complaint dated September 29, 2016 before the Additional Director General of Police, CID Telangana State and FIR No. 22 of 2016 was registered. The allegations made in FIR No. 22 of 2016 are similar to the allegations made in FIR No. 350 of 2012 and the allegations made in the present company petition is similar to the allegations made in FIR No. 22 of 2016. A writ petition in W. P. No. 40742 of 2016 was came to be filed by the respondents to quash the FIR No. 22 of 2016 and the same was dismissed by the hon'ble High Court. The SLP ch ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntioned to invoke the provisions of sections 213 and 241 of the Act, 2013. Mere incorporation of companies and trusts which was done for legal purposes with good intent is legal action for which a person cannot be penalized. The staff of the said companies and trusts are properly managed and trained. The company con ducts its meeting as per the requirement of the Companies Act. (j) The companies and trusts mentioned by the petitioners are not the holding companies of the respondent-company. The whistle blowing com plaint is also incorrect and the allegations are made without any support or evidences. The allegations are not related to the company and the second respondent has not made any threats. The company is a section 25 company and the second to eighth respondents are the directors of the same. Proper audits, filings were made and meetings were held in consonance with the law so that no improper allegations on the working of the first respondent-company could be made against it. With regard to the illegal removal of staff, the company has not received any petition against the retrenchment under the Industrial Disputes Act. The first petitioner was himself accused of indulgi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on. The said order was made by the hon'ble High Court in FIR No. 22 of 2016 wherein no alle gations were made against the company and also it has not been even accused. (n) The petitioners failed to submit any material evidence on record for the purpose of invoking the provisions of sections 213 and 241 of the Act and moreover the allegations raised which are more than three years old. Therefore, the present petition is barred by limitation. 4. Learned counsel for the first and eighth respondents while reiterating the above averments submitted that the petitioners have not made any case for invoking the provisions of sections 213 and 241 of the Act, 2013. The allegations made in the present petition are similar to the allegations made in the complaint registered under FIR No. 22 of 2016 which is partly investigated. No charge sheet is filed in the said FIR. He also submitted that filing of present petition is nothing but abuse of process of law. Therefore, he prayed to dismiss the petition. Learned counsel for the first and eighth respondent relied on [1969] 39 Comp Cas 781 (SC) ; AIR 1969 SC 707 (in the matter of) Rohtas Industries Ltd v. S. D. Agarwal and (C. P. No. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... atnakar and the present company petition. It is held by the hon'ble Supreme Court that the second FIR is maintainable. Therefore, the report of the Police, Police Station Basheerabad has no relevance whatso ever as the proceedings in the said FIR was held valid and maintainable as per the orders the hon'ble Supreme Court and the investigation is pending. (g) The company was incorporated in the year 2002 with enhanced vision and objectives. After incorporation, donor funds were flooded on various poverty alleviating activities targeting people below the poverty line (BPL) for promoting education, upliftment and social emancipation. More fascinating activity is emancipation of dalits under Dalit Freedom Net work now rechristened as Dignity Freedom Network in the other parts of the world. Ever since, the flow of funds towards various charity schemes increased in volumes the element of greed and bad faith entered into the leadership, various companies and other layers were created as conduits for misappropriation, misuse, diversion for self, persona, and family benefits was started. (h) The whistle blowing report clearly establishes financial irregularities, abuse of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ash the FIR and stall the investigation. The hon'ble High Court dismissed the said writ petition vide its order dated April 3, 2017. It is also a fact on record that the respondents who are accused in the FIR approached the Metropolitan Sessions Judge and obtained bail on April 28, 2017. The respondents have also filed a SLP and the hon'ble Supreme Court dismissed the SLP and directed the authorities to conclude the investigation expeditiously. Even according to the petitioners, the said complaint is under investigation by the CID, Telangana State. 9. The provisions of section 213 of the Act, 2013 empower the Tribunal to order Investigation into company's affairs in other cases and these provisions read as follows : The Tribunal may- (a) on an application made by- (i) not less than one hundred members or members holding not less than one-tenth of the total voting power, in the case of a company having a share capital ; or (ii) not less than one-fifth of the persons on the company's register of members, in the case of a company having no share capital, and supported by such evidence as may be necessary for the purpose of showing that the appli ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
