TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (7) TMI 629
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as Complainant and Jeevesh Sabharwal as Accused. 3. Briefly stated, sometime in 2011 Complainant/Suninder Sandha reached out to Accused/Jeevesh Sabharwal claiming himself to be having expertise in the field of marketing in real estate Projects. The parties jointly agreed to work on a Project named IRIDIA being built in Noida and developed by a Company namely, Horizon Buildcon Private Limited ("HBPL"). For this purpose a SPV called Horizon Concept Private Limited was floated wherein 25 percent of the shares were held by Complainant/Suninder Sandha and the remaining shares were held by HBPL. 4. In 2013, again Complainant/Suninder Sandha indicated his interest in working further with the Accused/Jeevesh Sabharwal on another Project called Orizzonte. For this purpose, CHIPL was formed and same was incorporated on 02.07.2013. Complainant/Suninder Sandha was to oversee the day-to-day affairs of CHIPL. 5. The parties parted ways in March 2016 pursuant to an MoU dated 16.03.2016. As per MoU Complainant/Suninder Sandha was to receive a total sum of Rs. 27 Crore by way of postdated cheques issued his favour. 6. After taking control of CHIPL, the Accused unearthed a fraud played by the Co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Court may issue a summons, or such officer a written order, to the person in whose possession or power such document or thing is believed to be, requiring him to attend and produce it, or to produce it, at the time and place stated in the summons or order." 16. From a bare reading of the above provision it is manifestly clear, that the two essential elements which are required to be proved by the Applicant are that: (i) it can be invoked against the person in whose possession or power such document obtained is believed to be and he can be directed to produce the same; and (ii) only those documents shall be called which are 'necessary or desirable' for the purpose of trial or other proceeding, in the opinion of the court. 17. In State of Orissa v. Debendra Nath Padhi, (2005) 1 SCC 568, it has been observed that:- "... 25. Any document or other thing envisaged under the aforesaid provision can be ordered to be produced on finding that the same is "necessary or desirable for the purpose of investigation, inquiry, trial or other proceedings under the Code". The first and foremost requirement of the section is about the document being necessary and desirable. The necessity or....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ioning of the Complainant during his employment with CHIPL. [From Complainant] Not in the possession of the Complainant. It is further submitted that the Investigating Agency has already investigated regarding the same and found nothing. Furthermore, the URL mentioned by the Accused Persons have become redundant as the same is not active now. This court is of the opinion that since the URL link has become redundant, no purpose would be served in calling for its data. As far as all the relevant documents relating to functions performed by the complainant during his employment in accused company are concerned, the same are expected to be maintained by the accused company and should be in their possession. 2. Documents related to the employment of the Complainant with CHIPL. [From Complainant & Close Relatives] Document sought is irrelevant for the present case. The Accused Persons are very well aware about the employment of the Complainant with the accused company and even otherwise, it is company of the Accused Persons and they are fully aware about their employees arid their details. This court is of the opinion that as all the relevant documents relating to employment ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s. Also, the legally enforceable debt in the present complaint is by way of MoU dated 16.03.2016 and hence, ITRs has no role to play. Same have not been denied to be in possession of the complainant and it appears to this Court that these documents will be necessary for the adjudication of the present matter, hence, the instant application qua these documents is partly allowed. 7. Original Electricity bill of House No. 22, NRI Complex, GK- IV, New Delhi, which was used as 'the address proof to open starlet account' Document sought is neither in possession of the Complainant and nor is relevant. As the same does not pertain to his property. The same are stated not to be in the possession of the complainant therefore, same cannot be directed to be produced as per the mandate of Section 91 Cr.P.C. 8. Correspondence/communication of Complainant with Mr. Jeevesh Sabharwal seeking approval price regarding sale of units by CHIPL Documents sought is irrelevant for the present case. It is pertinent to note here that very surprisingly, the accused no. 2 is seeking correspondences between Complainant and himself and then saying it is not in his own possession which is wholly ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....me cannot be directed to be produced as per the mandate of Section 91 Cr.P.C. 14. Bank Statement of Account of Complainant at HDFC Bank, 3NRI Complex, Greater Kailash-IV, New Delhi, 110019 Document sought is irrelevant for the present case. As it is not the case of Complainant that he has given some loan, etc. to the Accused Persons from his bank account. Same have not been denied to be in possession of the complainant and it appears to this Court that these documents will be necessary for the adjudication of the present matter, hence, the instant application qua these documents is partly allowed. 15. Bank Statements, Articles of Association, Memorandum of Association, Annual Returns of companies associated with the Complainant along with their audited balance sheets with complete schedules, and close relatives of the Complainant including: a. M/s Concept Capital Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd. from the year 2012-2017 b. M/s Concept Infravision Pvt. Ltd. from the year 2012-2017 c. M/s Ping Media Pvt. Ltd. from the year 2012-2017 d. M/s Scarlett Hospitality from the year 2012-2017 e. M/s Atma Ram Amarnath from the year 2012-2017 f. M/s CFG International Pvt. Ltd. fro....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....een denied to be produced by the Respondents. 23. The document at Serial number 1, the Control of CRM and IT Data hosted with URL, has been rightly denied by the Learned MM since this URL link has become redundant and no purpose would be served in calling for its data. 24. The documents at Serial number 2, relating to employment of the Complainant with CHIPL, have been rightly denied by observing that these documents would also be in power and possession of the Complainant. 25. The documents at Serial numbers 3,4,&5 pertain to the list of buyers from whom cash was collected in CHIPL's name; Documents relating to the employment of various employees and their roll while handling the affairs of CHIPL; and the receipts and documentation in regard to twenty five cheques issued by the allottees in favour of CHIPL against the sale of units. As can be made out these documents pertain to the affairs of the Company CHIPL and cannot be in any manner considered material or relevant for adjudication of the present complaint under Section 138 NI Act. 26. The document at Serial number 7 is original Electricity Bill installed at GK-IV, New Delhi as proof of the address of open Starlet account ....