https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766091 Writ jurisdiction cannot be used to quash an SFIO investigation report on allegations that it is arbitrary or ignores earlier investigative history where the report, read as a whole, discloses serious accusations of duplicate share issuance, falsification of records, siphoning of funds through shell entities, impersonation, and fraudulent pledging of shares. The Delhi High Court noted that earlier judicial determinations had already upheld the investigation direction and had taken notice of the SFIO material, so the petition effectively sought to relitigate issues already considered. It held that the court would not reappreciate evidence or assess the defence case before trial, and that the petitioners' grievances were matters for criminal proceedings. en-us Wed, 12 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 18 Feb 2025 08:10:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766091 Writ jurisdiction cannot be used to quash an SFIO investigation report on allegations that it is arbitrary or ignores earlier investigative history where the report, read as a whole, discloses serious accusations of duplicate share issuance, falsification of records, siphoning of funds through shell entities, impersonation, and fraudulent pledging of shares. The Delhi High Court noted that earlier judicial determinations had already upheld the investigation direction and had taken notice of the SFIO material, so the petition effectively sought to relitigate issues already considered. It held that the court would not reappreciate evidence or assess the defence case before trial, and that the petitioners' grievances were matters for criminal proceedings. Case-Laws Companies Law Wed, 12 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766091