9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (5) TMI 492X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tions. In the latest written instructions, the Investigating Officer mentioned that they have already completed investigation and filed charge sheet in the said crime. It is found that multiple purchase orders were mentioned which belong to Indian Companies across India. The credentials of all the said companies need to be verified - It is also relevant to mention that during the course of arguments, the learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that at the address of the petitioner company mentioned by it in the ROC records, which is in the State of Maharashtra State, it was locked and there is no one including Director or responsible person to cooperate with Investigating Officer by furnishing the information and documents to conclude the investigation. Admittedly, the account of the petitioner which was freezed is in HSBC, Gurugram. In the event of defreezing the said account of the petitioner without any condition, it would be difficult for the police or trial Court to take further steps in accordance with law since the police have to verify the credentials of the said companies including the petitioner company and several other crimes registered by the police with regard to t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the said account. The petitioner herein has specifically contended that it came to know about the freezing of its account through its banker only on deposit of a cheque. On enquiry, the petitioner came to know about the freezing of the said account by the Investigating Officer in relation to the Crime No.1432 of 2020, dated 25.07.2020 and Crime No.1580 of 2020, dated 11.08.2020. The petitioner herein further came to know that one of the Directors of the petitioner s company, Mr. Neeraj Kumar Tuli, has been associated with another Company i.e., M/s. Dockpay Technology Private Limited, which has been found associated in illegal gambling activity. The said M/s. Dockpay Technology Private Limited does not have any kind of association with the petitioner s company in its business or financial transactions. 6. The petitioner herein is a private limited company and dealing with the business of manufacturing, sale, purchase, import, export and trading of computer hardware and peripheral equipment, including, but not limited to provide service related to warranty, guarantee after sales, repair and maintenance for the said products. It is further contended by the petitioner that it is the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... KYUN DOCKPAY Wallets / accounts. Hence, served notice to the Nodal of the cash free [email protected], PAYTM [email protected] to furnish the beneficiaries. Accordingly, they have furnished the details. Then, the Investigating Officer sent notice to the concerned banks to debit freeze the account and statement of the accounts. Subsequently, the Investigating Officer received reply from the concerned banks and it contains the Account No.054050265001, Account Holder is DOKYPAY Technology Private Limited IFSC Code:HSBC0110005. He has also obtained KYC details from Paytm and Cashfree etc. 13. During the course of investigation, the Investigating Officer has arrested four accused including Neeraj Kumar Tuli, Director of the said Dokypay. He is also Director in other companies including the petitioner company. Therefore, the Investigating Officer on 16.11.2020 sent a notice under Sections - 91 and 160 of Cr.P.C. to the petitioner herein to appear before him on 19.11.2020 to verify the company operations etc., but he failed to appear before the Investigating Officer and the petitioner is not co-operating with the Investigating Officer in concluding investigation by furnishing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... any came to stand still and it is not in a position to continue its transactions and not in a position to pay salaries to its employees etc. 18. On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, would submit that there is no person on behalf of the petitioner to cooperate with the Investigating Officer by furnishing information and documents in concluding the investigation. The said Neeraj Kumar Tuli, common Director in both Dokypay and the Petitioner Company and amount was transferred to the account of the petitioner. Notice under Sections - 91 and 160 of Cr.P.C. was served on one Prince Jain, who in turn submitted his reply stating that he is neither a Director, nor an employee of the petitioner and he has no access to the bank details / statement of the petitioner company. Thus, the said fact and also the reply submitted by him would reveal that there is no responsible officer of petitioner Company and it is a shell company. According to him, there is nexus among the petitioner and Dokypay and also Mr. Neeraj Kumar Tuli. Considering the said facts and also the contentions of the respondent, the Court below has rightly dismissed the petition filed by the petit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ritten instructions that the Investigating Officer has completed investigation and filed charge sheet, vide S.R. No.3047 of 2020. C.C. number is awaited. 20. Though the Sub-Inspector of Police filed written instructions para-wise, there is no specific mention therein as to the amount transferred into the bank account of the petitioner company which was freezed by the Investigating Officer. It is only mentioned that it is a case of Online Betting organized from China by setting up companies in India. Total amount of betting activity is found to be nearly ₹ 1500 Crores, and a total of nearly ₹ 80 Crores is seized and frozen in different accounts. Nearly ₹ 105 Crores were found to be transferred to foreign accounts in Hong Kong and China. This activity was carried out across the Country. Thus, there is no specific mention about the amounts which were transferred to the account of the petitioner which was freezed. The amount mentioned in the complaint in Crime No.1432 of 2020 was only ₹ 97,000/-. 21. As discussed supra, the learned counsel, on instructions, has submitted that the petitioner company is ready to furnish bank guarantee for the amount mentione ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he said two counters, nothing is mentioned about the same and the details of the amount transferred into the account of the petitioner which was freezed. But, it is relevant to mention that the petitioner herein in the present petition sought the relief that it should be allowed to withdraw an amount of ₹ 11,59,61,954/- from the said bank account to meet its urgent needs by imposing any condition. The petitioner herein has also filed e-mail, dated 12.01.2021 with regard to the payments due by it. 25. As discussed supra, admittedly, the petitioner herein is the Indian Venture of Junxin Technology (Hong Kong) Co. Ltd., and in order to expand the business in India, it has been incorporated and registered with the Registrar of Companies Central. Since it is one of the requirements that an Indian Citizen to be inducted as a Director in the Company, they have inducted the said Mr. Neeraj Kumar Tuli as Director. The Promoters and the Directors of the petitioner company are the citizens of Republic of China. It is apt to mention that only one share was allotted to the said Mr. Neeraj Kumar Tuli. According to the petitioner, he has no powers of whatsoever. The same are specifically ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
