TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (11) TMI 308
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... attributed false statements to this Court, purportedly made during the course of the hearing on July 16, 2025. 3. The matter had come up for hearing on July 16, 2025, at around 11:45 A.M. After being heard, the matter was reserved for judgment, while the connected matters were deferred for hearing on another date. However, the Media houses, while reporting the proceedings of 16.07.2025, falsely projected that adverse observations were made against the learned Senior Counsel, stating that his conduct of seeking instructions was an act "unbecoming" of a Senior Advocate. It is submitted that no such statement was ever made by this Court and does not form part of the judicial Order recorded on 16.07.2025. 4. It is submitted that the Media reporting dated 16.07.2025, started at around 9:00 P.M. with an Article titled, "Agusta Westland case: Delhi High Court reserved order on an accused plea to quash an NBW." In the first few Articles reported between 9:00 P.M. and 11:00 P.M. on 16.07.2025, there is no reference to the alleged remark of this Court. Subsequently, however, it appears that with a mala fide intent to personally tarnish the reputation of the learned Senior Counsel, a f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ility of reporting proceedings in the Court with responsibility, but asserted that no directions, as sought, are mandated in the given circumstances. Submission heard and record perused. 9. By way of this Application, the Petitioner seeks the expungement of the remark allegedly made by this Court, as reported in various Media Houses. It is the Petitioner's assertion that such reporting has caused great harm to the reputation of the learned Senior Advocate and requires clarification. 10. It must be emphasized, as held in various judgments referred to by the Petitioner, that Media Houses owe an absolute responsibility to conduct sensible reporting. It cannot be overstated that media reports have a widespread impact on the general public, which may include some legal professionals. The majority of the public may not be aware of legal nuances and depend solely on media reports to know, about events happening in the country and the proceedings taking place in the Court. The Media has the absolute responsibility for accuracy and fairness in media reporting. 11. It has become a disturbing trend in recent times to report even some most innocuous remark that may be made by the C....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Petition with liberty to approach this Court for the relief. 18. The Petitioner claims that he is absolutely innocent and not connected with the alleged commission of offence that is being investigated by the Respondent in the captioned ECIR. He asserts that Non-bailable warrants were issued by the learned ASJ on 29.08.2020, on account of concealment of material facts from the Court, by Respondent/ED. By no stretch of imagination can the Petitioner be said to have either concealed himself or made himself scarce from assisting the investigating authorities in the investigation of the case. 19. It is claimed that the learned Trial Court erroneously observed that the Petitioner is trying to evade the investigation, even when the record shows that he joined the investigation physically when he was in India, responded to all summons issued to him, and provided all the documents sought. He asserts that he has always been ready and willing to join the investigation by the mechanism provided under the law, including but not limited to the sanctioned procedure of video conferencing. 20. It is settled law that the Court must record its objective satisfaction that the Petitioner is n....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Petitioner for appearing through VC, before the Court of the Principal Special Judge, CBI Cases, Hyderabad in CC No. 6/2012, titled Enforcement Directorate v. CBI & B.S. Acharya and Ors. This Application was dismissed vide Order dated 13.08.2020 by that Court in view of the bona fides of the Petitioner, his inability to travel back to India, and the availability of the video conferencing facility for investigation. The concerned Court also allowed the Petitioner's Application for permission to travel abroad on 13.08.2020, in the same case. 24. The Petitioner states that these Orders are important as they were passed on similar facts and circumstances and based on the same reasoning and averments made in the present case. Therefore, the learned Trial Court erred in observing that the aforesaid Orders of the Competent Court at Hyderabad were not relevant to the present case. 25. It is claimed that the issuance of non-bailable warrants against the Petitioner is mala fide and has been done for oblique reasons to curtail the precious liberty of the Petitioner. 26. The brief factual narrative as per the Petitioner Shravan Gupta is that he is a world-renowned businessman, who h....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....1.2019. This communication categorically conveyed his willingness to supply the information through Mr. Rahul Upadhyay, as the Petitioner was unavailable in person owing to his illness and complete bed rest as advised by the doctor. Subsequently, more documents related to the Income Tax Assessment of MGF Development Limited and associated Companies were sought, which were supplied on 26.11.2019 and 27.11.2019. 31. Thereafter, the Petitioner had to travel to the UK in the latter part of 2019 due to business exigencies, for which he was permitted vide Order dated 30.01.2019 in CBI Case No. 6/2012. The arbitration proceedings in relation to the dispute with EMAAR had started much prior to the issuance of Notice dated 23.11.2019. 32. Subsequent thereto, another Summons dated 16.12.2019 was received, which was duly replied vide communication dated 18.12.2019, which was submitted on 19.12.2019. It was brought to the notice of the Respondent/ED that the Petitioner was not in India but was travelling, with a promise that he would appear in person immediately upon his return. The contact details of the Petitioner were made available. 33. Another Summons dated 23.12.2019 was issued ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d difficulty in travelling, permitted the examination of the said witness through video conferencing, thus not requiring him to leave his residence and travel to another city/country. 39. The mechanism of recording evidence through video conferencing, has been upheld by the Supreme Court in the cases of State of Maharashtra vs. Dr. Prafull B. Desai & Anr., AIR 2003 SC 2053; Manju Devi vs. State of Rajasthan; AIR 2019 SC 1976, Parenthood Federation vs. Madhu Bala Nath, FAO (OS) 416/2015, Geeta Sethi vs. State, 91 (2001) DLT 47 and Raghuwansh Dewanchand Bhasin vs. State of Maharashtra; 2011 (11) SCR 300. 40. Therefore, there is no gainsaying that the Respondent cannot adopt the same methodology so far as recording of statements under Section 50 PMLA is concerned. The Petitioner in the aforesaid factual matrix cannot be termed as not cooperating in the investigations. 41. Reference is made to Santosh vs. State, 2017 (12) SCALE 524, wherein the Apex Court held that the Petitioner cannot be taken in custody only for the purpose of enabling the investigating authority to extract a confession, and cooperation does not mean that the Accused must be put in custody to admit his guil....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... to find the person to serve him with a summon; or (iii) It is considered that the person could harm someone if not placed into custody immediately. 47. The aforesaid circumstances are conspicuously absent in the present case, and no NBWs could have been issued against him. 48. Reliance is also placed on Sunil Kumar vs. State; 2002 Cr.L.J 1284, wherein the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court opined that coercive measures like the issuance of an NBW or process under Section 82 Cr.P.C., are only to secure the presence of the Accused, and the order passed to this extent must indicate the objective satisfaction of the Trial Court. Where the person is in regular contact with the investigating agency and is willing to appear through a prescribed and prevalent mechanism sanctioned by law, it cannot be said that he is concealing himself. The NBWs were, therefore, directed to be cancelled. 49. Reliance is further placed on Mani Shandy vs. State (2008) 102 DRJ 578, wherein this Court, while dealing with issuance of NBWs and personal liberty of an individual, observed that every criminal Court is a creature of the Criminal Procedure Code and any order which is passed beyond the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....il, bank routes, and bank statements of all the Companies, having exercised the remedial power under Section 57 PMLA or otherwise in accordance with law. The Respondent has further admitted that the aforesaid Concerns remitted certain money to M/s Interstellar Technologies Limited, Mauritius, in regard to which the Respondent is also in possession of the requisite money trail. Therefore, all the relevant evidence of this transaction is already in the Respondent's possession and it does not require custody of any person for the purpose of further investigation. The learned Trial Court has not considered these aspects. 55. It is submitted that the learned Trial Court ought to have given due consideration to the fact that the Respondent already have filed the main Complaint as well as a supplementary Complaint against one Accused, Gautam Khaitan. The second supplementary Complaint has been filed against Sushen Mohan Gupta, and the third supplementary Complaint has been filed against Ratul Puri. Similarly, a separate supplementary Complaint has been filed against Christian Michel James. None of the main Complaints or any of the supplementary Complaints contains any discriminatory or....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ince it is the settled position of law that the Accused must be present in person and submit himself to the jurisdiction of the Court for the cancellation of the NBW. Reliance is placed on Ashok Malik vs. M/s Soga Impex Private Limited and Anr., 2012 SCC OnLine Del 3464(2). It is the settled position of law that the Trial Court has jurisdiction and power to issue NBWs in aid of investigation, as has been held in the case of Mrigendra Jalan vs. State & Am. 2008 SCC OnLine Del 1067, Ottavio Quattrocchi vs. Central Bureau of Investigation (1998) SCC OnLine Del 519, State vs. Dawoon Ibrahim Kaskar (2000) 10 SCC 438] and Sukhmeet Singh Anand vs. State of NCT Delhi, 2018 SCC OnLine Del 10674. 61. It is submitted that the facts involved in the present case is that Augusta Westland International Limited, UK engaged Mr. Guido Haschke and Carlo Gerosa, along with Mr. Christian Michel James, as middlemen to influence the contract of VVIP Helicopters in favour of M/s Augusta Westland International Limited. Guido Haschke and Carlo Gerosa, received commissions through their Companies M/s Gordian Service SARL, Tunisia (Gordian) to the tune of Euro 400,000/- and M/s IDS Information Technology a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r and his family members have also applied for citizenship of Commonwealth of Dominica. By doing so, he is intentionally and deliberately evading the summons, thereby hampering the ongoing investigations under PMLA and scuttling the proceedings against himself on account of non-appearance. 66. The search and seizure operation have been conducted on the Group Companies and Associates of Shravan Gupta and incriminating documents and digital devices have been seized, which revealed incriminating facts against the Petitioner, who is required to be confronted with these documents. The custodial interrogation of the Petitioner would be required for effective investigation. 67. The claim of the Petitioner that he has always supplied documents as and when instructed by the Respondent is factually incorrect. He time and again, was asked to disclose facts relating to his foreign entities but he has avoided disclosing about them. After receiving the response to LRs, the Respondent has come to know that the proceeds of crime were laundered and parked in his foreign Company as well. It is not possible to confront the Petitioner with the voluminous documents recovered during the search con....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ertions made in the Petition and has denied the averments made in the Counter Affidavit. Submissions heard and record perused. 75. The Petition has been filed under S. 482 of Cr.P.C. seeking to challenge an Order dated 05.12.2020, by which the Petitioner's Application for the cancellation of NBWs issued in ECIR No. 15/BZLO/2014, was dismissed. 76. The ECIR No. 15/BZLO/2014 was registered by the Respondent/Directorate of Enforcement on the allegations of corruption and payment of bribes in the procurement of Augusta Westland Helicopters an Italian Company. Certain persons were arrested and were arraigned as accused in the said case. After two years of registration of ECIR, summons had been issued on 02.05.2016 asking him to join the investigations. He accordingly joined the investigations in the office of ED and provided full cooperation. He was interrogated at length for more than 7 hours. Significantly, as per the Petitioner's own case, he was served with summons again on 22.09.2017, i.e., after more than one and a half years. Likewise, further summons were issued to him between 23.11.2019 to 25.11.2019 in response to which the documents sought were duly supplied by the empl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssuing a warrant is to compel the attendance of an accused, who has displayed a persistent reluctance or intent to evade the judicial process. 82. While acknowledging that an NBW is an extraordinary measure, the Apex Court in Inder Mohan Goswami & Ors. Vs State of Uttaranchal & Ors., 2007 (12) SCC 1, noted that it is a necessary power vested in the courts to ensure that the due process of law is not frustrated by the accused. 83. The power to issue an NBW is a discretionary power that must be exercised judiciously, but as observed by the Apex Court in Raghuvansh Dewanchand Bhasin vs. State of Maharashtra, 2011 (11) SCR 300 this discretion is primarily geared toward securing the presence of the accused. It is further noted that a warrant of arrest cannot be issued mechanically; the court must record satisfaction that the facts and circumstances of the case warrant it. 84. Where the accused has been served with summons, and/or subsequent Bailable Warrants (BWs), and failed to appear, the Trial Court is not only justified but obligated to issue an NBW to prevent the proceedings from stalling. As observed by the Apex Court in Sunil Kumar vs. State, 2002 Cr.L.J 1284, the issuan....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....me principle that a Magistrate has the authority under Section 73 Cr.P.C. to issue a Non-Bailable Warrant against an accused who is absconding and is required for the purpose of investigation. 91. The aforesaid judgements make it explicit that the issuance of an NBW is the logical and necessary consequence when an accused, having sufficient notice of the proceedings, chooses to wilfully disregard the investigative process. The issuance of an NBW becomes necessary when the accused's conduct suggests that he is evading the investigation. This evasion is clearly demonstrated by the failure to join the probe despite service of summons. 92. In Anil Kumar Madan, (supra) the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court observed that the accused's persistent non-cooperation and non-appearance, even after being given opportunities, justified the issuance of NBWs. The Court found that the conduct of the accused in "continuously defying the process of law" necessitates the use of coercive mechanisms to ensure their participation. 93. The justification for an NBW is significantly strengthened when the investigating agency has already established a prima facie involvement of the accused in the alle....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....only two days later, on 26.11.2019, demonstrating a "clear intention to avoid the investigation". The accused failed to join the investigation despite the service of nine separate summonses. The accused is a resident of London/Dubai and is alleged to have applied for citizenship of the Commonwealth of Dominica, though denied by him, indicating a concerted effort to place himself beyond the reach of Indian law, thereby confirming the Goswami exception that he "will not voluntarily appear." 99. NBWs should not be issued where the investigative purpose is merely procedural or primarily aimed at forcing a confession, as has been held in Santosh, (supra). However, in the instant case, the NBW is essential for legally compelling the custodial interrogation of the accused, which the investigating agency deems indispensable to uncover the complex money trail. The ED has stated that effective investigation and unearthing the conspiracy cannot be done without confronting the accused with voluminous documents seized during search in June 2020 and incriminating evidence received through Letter Rogatories regarding foreign entities controlled by him. a. Prima facie case and Non-cooperatio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of the NBW. This Court finds this contention to be wholly unsustainable in law and fact, particularly considering the nature of the PMLA offence and the requirement of effective investigation. a. V.C. Rules Confer No Inherent Right to Evade Physical Appearance 108. It is contended on behalf of the Petitioner that the VC rules permit the joining of a party through V.C. However, V.C has been introduced to facilitate the progress of trial and to cause minimum inconvenience to the witnesses, who otherwise are unable to travel. 109. However, it does not give an inherent right to the Petitioner to deny appearing in person even though his presence is mandatorily required. He cannot take a shelter behind VC Rules to assert that he can claim to join investigations through VC. 110. Furthermore, as has been explained by the Respondent, though the documents may have been made available on behalf of the Petitioner, but his physical presence is required to confront him with voluminous documents. As has been rightly submitted that the Petitioner cannot be confronted with these documents through V.C.; the Respondent was thus, well justified in seeking his physical presence. The repeat ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ries concerning his foreign entities; which cannot be effectively done through V.C. 118. The physical presence of the accused is necessitated to ensure immediate, effective, and legally valid responses. This is practically impossible to conduct comprehensively through V.C. where the documents cannot be verified and tendered instantly. 119. This Court acknowledges the principle that custody cannot be sought merely to extract a confession, as held in Santosh (supra). However, the present purpose is the unearthing of evidence and the tracing of the complex money trail in an economic offence, which is only possible through detailed, continuous custodial interrogation - a necessary tool that the investigating agency is entitled to employ. 120. And most significantly, the accused cannot be permitted to dictate the terms of investigation, like insisting on video conferencing in the instant case, when the complexity of the facts requires a detailed confrontation with voluminous documents, a process rightly held by the Trial Court to be difficult to conduct effectively via video conference. 121. As the Apex Court has aptly noted in Dukhishyam Benupani vs. Arun Kumar Bajoria, (19....