TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (8) TMI 1433
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vide Crime No. 611 of 2023, U/s 420 and 120-B IPC and Section 82 of Registration Act, 1908, Police Station- Kavi Nagar- Ghaziabad. II. Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of MANDAMUS directing the Respondent no.2 not to arrest and/or take any coercive steps against the petitioners or ay of its officers, officials, representatives, employees, managers, etc. in pursuance of the first information report dated 22.07.2023 (Annexure No.1 to this petition) vide Crime No. 611 of 2023, U/s 420 and 120-B IPC and Section 82 of Registration Act, 1908, Police Station- Kavi Nagar- Ghaziabad. III. Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of MANDAMUS directing to stay all investigations or any consequential actions by any authority/agency pursuant to registration of FIR No. 611 of 2023 dated 22.07.2023 registered at PS Kavi Nagar and the allegations contained therein; IV. Issue any other or further Writ, Order or Direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit, just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. V. To award the cost of Writ Petition." 3. The matter was heard by a Division Bench of this Court.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....petition has been taken up out of turn on the ground of urgency mentioned before the Bench of Hon'ble The Chief Justice and has been placed before this Court today itself, he wants some time to seek proper instructions. However, he submits that individual offence would attract individual first information report and has to be proceeded individually, therefore, the present matter stands on a different footing. 10. Though, we have heard learned counsel for the parties for sometime, in the interest of justice, as on date, in view of the interim protection granted by the Hon'ble Apex Court wherein while permitting the petitioners to approach respective High Courts having jurisdiction, interim protection was granted and also by this Court as well in other petition, we are inclined to pass an interim order till the next date of listing. 11. Paragraph nos. 18 and 19 of the order dated 13.07.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 10893 of 2023 (Neeraj Tyagi and another vs. State of U.P. and 3 others) are quoted as under : "18. Further, on 4 July, 2023, in the case Ganga Banga vs. Samit Mandal & Anr. (Contempt Petition (Civil) No.774 of 2023), the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....21. List the case in the week commencing 28 August, 2023." (emphasis supplied) 12. In view of the aforesaid, noticing the fact that interim protection has been granted by Hon'ble Apex Court, which was extended by this Court to the petitioners of the abovenoted petition it is provided that in the present case as well, the interim protection as granted in the aforesaid case vide paragraph no. 19 is also extended to the present petitioners till the next date of listing. 13. Put up this matter as fresh on 11.08.2023." 4. The other Hon'ble Judge passed a separate order of the same date. The same is extracted herein below:- "1. Heard Sri Rakesh Dwivedi, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Raghav Dwivedi, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Manish Tiwari, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Sayed Imran Ibrahim, learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 3 and Sri Ratan Singh, learned AGA for the State. 2. Learned A.G.A. submits that as this matter has come out of turn, therefore, he is not having instructions as on date and shall seek instructions if sometime is granted. 3. This writ petition has been filed prayin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....different matter and they are not arisen out with the impugned F.I.R. and thus they are not able to support to the petitioners at this stage. 6. Paragraph nos. 18 and 19 of the order dated 13.07.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 10893 of 2023 (Neeraj Tyagi and another vs. State of U.P. and 3 others), are quoted the Supreme Court order as under : "18. Further, on 4 July, 2023, in the case Ganga Banga vs. Samit Mandal & Anr. (Contempt Petition (Civil) No.774 of 2023), the Supreme Court has passed the following order: "6. In the circumstances, as it may also involve adjudication on facts, we deem it appropriate to permit the petitioners to approach the respective jurisdictional High Courts to challenge all four FIRs and the ECIR within two weeks from today, with a request to the respective High Courts to consider and decide the petitions expeditiously, not later than six months of their presentation. 7. We also direct DGPs of respective States to look into the matter, examine the contentions of the petitioners in respect of the contents of FIRs, and to take appropriate measures in accordance with law within a period of one month. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ce. I would like to add here that special provision of Section 41-A Cr.P.C. is there for protection from arrest. I am not inclined to issue interim protection in hasty manner that too without giving time to AGA to seek instructions. 9. So for as the non-disclosure some material fact in F.I.R. is concerned, it is well settled that F.I.R. is not an encyclopedia and each and every fact is not necessary to have mentioned in it. 10. Normal practice of this Bench is that without instruction to AGA, this Bench is not inclined to hear the matter and AGA seeks time to have instructions from the police station concerned. Proper way is to give time to AGA to take necessary instructions and later to pass effective order causing damage to other side. 11. In my view, considering the facts and other circumstances of the matter and other material on record, no prima facie case for issuing interim protection, at this stage, is made out and I do not think it proper to issue any interim protection in favour of petitioners without having response from informant as well State. It would be appropriate to have response from other side before issuing any direction. 12. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f petitioners without having response from informant as well State. It was thus observed that it would be appropriate to have response from the other side before issuing any direction. The matter was thus posted as fresh on 11.08.2023. 10. The facts in brief are that a first information report was lodged as Case Crime No. 0611 of 2023, under Sections 420, 120-B I.P.C. and Section 82 of the Registration Act, 1908, Police Station- Kavi Nagar, District- Ghaziabad by Mohit Singh the opposite party no.3 against the petitioner no.1- Smt. Reena Bagga, Sumit Kumar Narwar, Rajiv Goyal, Parvinder Singh and Amit Nain on the basis of an application addressed to the Chief Minister, Government of Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow alleging therein that he is the authorised representative of M/s. Shipra Hotel. On Plot No. 9, Ahinsakhand Indirapuram, District Ghaziabad, Shipra Mall of Shipra Hotel company is situated which has been sold in an illegal manner in conspiracy, forgery, cheating and against the provisions of law by Smt. Reena Bagga the authorised representative of India Bulls Housing Finance Ltd. to Himri Estate Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi by executing a saledeed in favour of Rajiv Goyal the authorised....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... certificate of the property in question. The proceedings relate to financial transactions in the nature of loan, its non-payment and auction of property. 12. Although there is a difference of opinion between the members of the Division Bench and the matter has been referred under Chapter VIII Rule 3 of the Rules of the Court but in the referring order the point of difference is not noted. 13. This Court to whom the matter has been nominated for opinion after difference in the Division Bench, after perusing the two orders of dated 27.07.2023 passed by the Hon'ble members of the Bench independently comes to a conclusion that the difference therein is on the point as to whether the Court without granting time to the learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the first informant for seeking instructions could have proceeded to hear the matter an passed an interim order. 14. Learned counsel for the petitioners argued that the dispute is purely a civil dispute. It is argued that no offence whatsoever has been made out. It is argued that the matter is squarely covered by the order of the Apex Court in the case of Gagan Banga vs. Samit Mandal & another: Contempt Petition (Civil) No. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....27/2023 dated 09.04.2023 registered at P.S. Indirapuram with some overlapping facts. It is stated that on the basis of these two connected FIRs namely FIR No. 427/2023 and 197/2023, now the ED has registered ECIR bearing No. ECIR/HIU-I/06/2023 in Delhi. The petitioners have now challenged the said FIRs and ECIR. 6. In the circumstances, as it may also involve adjudication on facts, we deem it appropriate to permit the petitioners to approach the respective jurisdictional High Courts to challenge all four FIRs and the ECIR within two weeks from today, with a request to the respective High Courts to consider and decide the petitions expeditiously, not later than six months of their presentation. 7. We also direct DGPs of respective States to look into the matter, examine the contentions of the petitioners in respect of the contents of FIRs, and to take appropriate measures in accordance with law within a period of one month. 8. Till final disposal of the respective petitions, interim order dated 28.04.2023 passed in W.P.(Crl.) No. 166/2023 would continue in the three FIRs mentioned therein. 9. In so far as the further FIR No. 197/2023 dated 15.04.2....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....te. It is argued that even it was mentioned that since offences are punishable up to 7 years, the arrest of the accused is not essential by the police and as such the petitioners are sufficiently protected because of Section 41-A Cr.P.C. While addressing the matter on merits it was argued that the issue relates not only to Shipra Mall but also to the land beyond it which has been taken in possession by the accused persons. It is argued that as such offence is made out. Learned counsel has relied upon the an order of the a Division of this Court in the case of Manoj Kumar Barnwal and others Vs. State of U.P. and others, 2021 SCC OnLine All 280 and argued that while considering a petition for quashing and relying upon the judgement of the Apex Court in the case of Neeharika Infrasturcture Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Maharasthra, Criminal Appeal No. 330 of 2021 decided on 13 April, 2021 refused to interfere in the matter. 17. Learned Additional Advocate General for the State of U.P. submits that since the offences are punishable up to 7 years, the petitioners shall not be arrested. He has placed before the Court the some judgements of the Apex Court to submit that in view of the said ju....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt Nos.1 & 2, Sri Aditya Bhushan Singhal, learned Counsel for Respondent No.3 and Sri Sikandar Bharat Kochar, learned counsel appearing for Respondent No.4, Directorate of Enforcement. 2. The writ petition has been filed seeking issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction, declaring Section 420 of I.P.C. as manifestly arbitrary and ultra vires to the Constitution of India on the vice of Articles 14 & 21 as also for issuance of a writ of certiorari quashing, qua the writ petitioners, their officers, representatives and managers, the impugned F.I.R. No.0197 of 2023 dated 15.04.2023, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B I.P.C., Police Station Beta-2, Greater Noida, Gautam Buddh Nagar, registered by Respondent No.3 with all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom together with the consequent proceedings initiated by Respondent No.4 in E.C.I.R. bearing No.ECIR/HIU-1/06/2023. 3. The petitioners, by way of interim relief, have prayed for stay of the summoning of the petitioners, its Officers, Representatives and Managers by the Officers of Respondent Nos.2 & 4 as also the proceedings qua them arising from and consequent to the institution of the im....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....by the Shipra Groups and M/ s Kadam Developers Pvt. Ltd. with Petitioner No.2, Indiabulls Housing Finance Ltd., regarding pledging of 100% equity shares (demated) of M/s Kadam Developers to secure the loan. The Shipra Group committed default and Petitioner No.2, in terms of the stipulation contained in the loan agreement, issued notices on 20.10.2020 to Shipra Group requiring them to provide alternate security within 15 days and on the failure of the Shipra Group to respond, issued 14 loan recall notices on 05.11.2020, 14.12.2020 and 15.12.2020 whereby approximately Rs.1763.00 Crores was sought to be recovered. Ultimately, Petitioner No.2, Indiabulls Housing Finance Ltd., under the share sale and purchase agreement dated 01.07.2021 sold the pledged equity shares to one M/s Finalstep Developers Pvt. Ltd. (earlier known as Creative Souls Technology India Pvt. Ltd.) with M3M India Pvt. Ltd., as confirming party for a consideration of R.900.00 Crores. The fact of the sale was informed to YEIDA/ Respondent No.3 by M/s. Kadam Developers within 45 days of the sale. Besides the sale of the shares of M/s Kadam Developers, the Petitioner No.2 also sold a property mortgaged by Shipra Group na....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n no violation of the mortgage permission. The notice dated 11.4.2023 has been withdrawn by YEIDA and no demand has been raised on any party. v) F.I.R. No. 427 of 2023 dated 9.4.2023 registered at Police Station Indirapuram, which has a reference in the impugned F.I.R. No.197 dated 15.04.2023 registered at Police Station Beta-2, Greater Noida, U.P. and E.C.I.R bearing No. ECIR/HIU-I/06/2023 in Delhi was the subject matter of Contempt Petition (Civil) No.774 of 2023 arising out of Criminal Appeal No.463 of 2023 (Gagan Banga versus Samit Mandal and another) along with Writ Petition (Crl.) No.166 of 2023 and SLP (Crl.) Nos.4639-4641/2023 before the Apex Court. The Apex Court disposed off the petitions by making observations as regards the impugned F.I.R. and E.C.I.R. that no coercive steps would be taken against the petitioner financial institution and its Officers, Representatives and Managers till final disposal of the writ petition before the High Court and it would be open for the petitioners to seek stay of the proceedings which would be considered by the High Court on its own merits. 10. In the light of the above, it is submitted that the interim relief prayed ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... observed:- "3. In "Priyanka Srivastava Vs. State of U.P.", (2015) 6 SCC 287, this Court had noticed that taking recourse to criminal law by bypassing statutory remedies to bring the financial institutions on their knees, has the inherent potentiality to affect the marrows of economic health of the nation. Further, in "Vijay Kumar Ghai & Anr. Vs. State of W.B. & Ors." (2022) 7 SCC 124, this Court quashed the criminal proceedings being abuse of law in a purely civil financial dispute and being a case of forum shopping. Despite these judgments, continuation of such trend appears extremely disturbing." 17. We further find that the Apex Court had vide its order dated 28.4.2023 passed in Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 166 of 2023 stayed the criminal proceedings in the three F.I.Rs. including the F.I.R. No. 427 of 2023 dated 9.4.2023 registered at Police Station Indirapuram which F.I.R. has reference in the impugned F.I.R. and at the same time has directed that no coercive steps would be taken against the petitioner financial institution and its Officers, Representatives and Manager till final disposal of the writ petition. The protection granted by the Apex Court is operativ....