9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (7) TMI 72X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inference that the petitioner has a huge financial base outside India and he has not come to the Court with clean hands and that by itself disentitles him to grant of any discretionary relief. This Court finds that having regard to the fact that prima facie it appears that the petitioner has sizeable assets and properties, directly or indirectly, outside India in foreign jurisdictions as discussed hereinabove and there is a strong inference that if liberty to go abroad is granted to him, he may not come back to India to face the investigation and trial, as and when it commences. This Court finds that the reliefs claimed by the petitioner seeking permission to go abroad to attend the graduation ceremony of his two sons on the scheduled dates cannot be allowed. There are sufficient grounds to raise an inference that in case such liberty is granted to the petitioner, he may abuse the same and may not come back to India so as to scuttle the entire investigation and the ensuing process. Thus, this Court finds no illegality, perversity or incorrect approach adopted by the learned Special Judge in passing the impugned order dated 05.06.2024. Petition allowed. - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g in the UK United Kingdom at University College London and Durham University, respectively and they are completing their education in the concerned courses in June, 2024; and that the petitioner wishes to attend the graduation ceremony of his son Vivaan P. Singh on completion of his Bachelor s degree in Physics and Maths from Durham University, which is scheduled on 01.07.2024 as also the graduation ceremony of his other son Mr. Anhad P. Singh on completion of his Bachelor s degree in Maths and Economics from University College, London, which is scheduled on 02.09.2024. 5. Mr. Sibal, learned Senior Advocate has invited the attention of this Court to the judicial orders passed by the different Courts in the criminal proceedings sub-judice against the petitioner, thereby granting him permission to travel abroad, for attending the aforesaid events, the details of which are as under:- (i) FIR No. 50/2019 PS EOW South East under Section 419/420/120-B IPC by the learned ASJ-02, South East, Saket Courts, Delhi; (ii) Misc. Crl. Appl. No. 366/2024 under Section 44 of the PML Prevention of Money Laundering Act Act in complaint No. ECIR/DLZO/II/05/2019 vide order dated 22.05.2024 by the lear ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itted that the petitioner has no overseas business interests, much less in the UK. It is also pointed that in the period prior to the commencement of investigation by the SFIO or around the same time, had travelled to Singapore frequently, from April, 2018 till January, 2019 and infact travelled in January, 2019 to UK as well and returned back to India, and thus, he can be branded as a flight risk . 11. Challenging, albeit half-heartedly the legality of the LOC itself at the instance of the SFIO, it is also deposed vide paragraph (4) of the short affidavit dated 18.06.2004 as under: 4. That the Deponent further submits that the Deponent does not have any immovable properties in his name nor he has any source of income. In any case, in the execution proceedings filed by Daichi before this Hon'ble Court, the Deponent s movable and immovable assets, if any, have already been attached. The Applicant s sister-in-law (Mrs. Arundhati Singh) and mother-in-law (Mrs. Rajshree Singh) however jointly own Unit bearing No. 604 situated at 7th floor, Plot No. 212, Block III, Tulsiani Chambers, Mumbai, 40021 and the original title deeds of the said immovable property can be deposited before th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g and China. 15. Learned Standing Counsel submitted that although the petitioner has justifiable emotional and personal reasons to attend the graduation ceremony of his sons, the paramount economic interest of the company cannot be brushed aside, particularly when there are prima facie findings of the investigation carried so far suggesting that more than Rs. 1800 crores have been siphoned off out of India. In this regard, learned Standing Counsel alluded to the observations by the learned Special Judge vide paragraphs (32) and (33), which read as under:- 32. The interest of the nation, whether economic or strategic, is paramount. In the present case, economic/national interest of the country is involved. Therefore, this case falls under the exception. In this case, SFIO has not disclosed properly as to whether LOC has been reviewed or not but in the backdrop of facts discussed above, this fact does not assume much significance. The application has been moved by the applicant for attending graduation ceremony of his son. Three other children of applicant are already in U.K., one of whom is also working/running business there. Though it cannot be said that attending graduation cerem ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ns advanced at the Bar. I have meticulously perused the relevant records of the case as well as the case laws cited at the Bar. 19. It is borne out from the record that SFIO is investigating into the affairs of the FHL and REL and other associated/sister concerns in exercise of its plenary powers under Section 212(4) of the Companies Act, 2013 in larger public interest as the matter involves allegations of fraud, misappropriation and siphoning off of the funds through use of multiple conduit companies, ever-greening of loans from the financial institutions and alleged losses caused to the companies and the public. 20. It is also brought to the fore that the petitioner was a promoter of REL having 16.31% shareholding through RHC , of which he was the non-executive director from 13.12.2004 to 06.04.2010. Thereafter, he held the post of non-executive director as well as Vice Chairman from 29.07.2016 to 14.02.2018 and was the Managing Director of FHL from 13.11.2003 till 01.01.2016. Thereafter, he held the post of Director w.e.f. 01.01.2016 till 08.02.2018 thereby, controlling and managing the key operations of the REL and FHL throughout the said period. Evidently, the alleged cases of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and at the cost of repetition, some of the companies are based in USA, Singapore, Sri Lanka and Mexico apart from UK and Mauritius. 24. Without delving into the merits of the allegations, the long and short of the aforesaid discussion is that the deposition by the petitioner in his affidavit dated 18.06.2024 that he has no assets or properties in India is manifestly not bringing forth the correct facts. The deposition is flawed with incomplete disclosure, and thus, not inspiring confidence. The aforesaid narrative coupled with the documents placed on the record invite a strong inference that the petitioner has a huge financial base outside India and he has not come to the Court with clean hands and that by itself disentitles him to grant of any discretionary relief. 25. Although much mileage is sought to be drawn from the judicial orders passed in other proceedings pending against the petitioner, as referred hereinabove, the magnitude of the investigation being conducted by the SFIO in public interest so as to safeguard the economic and national interest of the country which stands at a much higher pedestal. Indeed, attending the graduation ceremony of his son, which event is a onc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e the petitioner facing prosecution in respect of certain offences under the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 was shown to have travelled abroad on as many as 20 occasions in the past with the permission of the Court and it is in such circumstances that he was allowed to travel to Canada for the purpose of admission of his son for 15 days. The decision in the case of Prateek Chitkara (supra) was one where the petitioner was facing prosecutions under the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the Black Money Act, 2015 and considering his young age, family ties in India and his otherwise clean financial track record, the LOC issued against him was allowed to be suspended so as to enable him to travel abroad for a limited period. 29. Indeed, in the instant case as espoused by the learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner, although he has travelled abroad to Singapore and UK during the period April, 2018 to February, 2019, however, the said visits had taken place when the investigation by the SFIO had barely commenced. 30. In view of the foregoing discussion, unhesitatingly, this Court finds that the reliefs claimed by the petitioner seeking permission to go abroad to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
