TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (11) TMI 1211
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....turn to UK in August 2022, was stopped at IGI Airport due to a Look Out Circular (LOC) dated 13.06.2022 issued pursuant to an SFIO investigation ordered on 09.03.2022 into Net4 India Ltd., and related family-run companies over alleged siphoning of about Rs. 208 crores from Indian and foreign banks. She suffered a cardiac arrest in September 2022, pursuant to that she filed writ petitions challenging the LOC dated 13.06.2022 and permission to travel to UK for medical reasons. Permission was conditionally allowed on 09.11.2022 subject to disclosure of bank accounts, appointment of a competent representative, and an undertaking of cooperation. However, this Court later found her non-compliant as she refused to share bank statements beyond two years, appointed an inexperienced representative, withheld details of her son (a co-accused residing abroad), and denied knowledge of company affairs. Observing her lack of cooperation and risk of absconding, this Court on 13.12.2022 declined permission to travel, however stating that if in the next two months, the Petitioner fully cooperates with the SFIO, this Court will reconsider the issue, and on 16.08.2023 dismissed her petitions bearing no....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the investigation being complete save for approval of the Central Government under Section 212(12) of the Companies Act, 2013. 5. Learned Senior Counsel submitted that the Petitioner, a 76-year-old widow and is a British citizen since 2000, permanently resides in the U.K. She has been suffering from multiple serious health ailments including arrhythmia, dementia, thalassemia, and post-pacemaker complications requiring urgent replacement with a MICRA AV device, has been compelled to remain in India for over two years due to the travel restrictions, despite her full cooperation with the Respondent and compliance with Court directions. It was submitted that her right to travel abroad for urgent medical treatment is an integral facet of "personal liberty" guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, which extends even to foreign nationals. Reliance has been placed upon Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India 1978 AIR 597, Satwant Singh Sawhney v. D. Ramarathnam 1967 AIR(SC) 1836, Louis De Raedt v. Union of India 1991 AIR(SC) 1886, and more recently in Anuras v. Bank of India 2022 SCC OnLine Bom 1160, and denial of such right merely on speculative apprehension of her non-return ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... was only a façade to obstruct investigation. 9. Reliance was placed on the findings in the judgment dated 16.08.2023 (Annexure A-13) wherein a co-ordinate bench of this Court recorded that the Petitioner had vast business experience, actively participated in siphoning funds, and her plea of ignorance could not be accepted. Reliance was also placed upon Mandhir Singh Todd v. ED Crl. M.C. 289/2023, where on similar facts the request of a British national to travel abroad for medical treatment was declined since such treatment was available in India, as also upon Ghanshyam Pandey v. UOI W.P.(C) 3545/2022 and ED v. Kanwar Deep Singh Crl. M.C. 1748/2022, to contend that the present petition also merits dismissal. 10. It has been further submitted that the petitioner was questioned on 13.03.2023 to produce the bank statements of all her Indian as well as non-Indian accounts she had, but she gave an evasive statement. Rejoinder submissions of the petitioner: 11. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submitted that the reliance placed by the respondents on alleged non-submission of bank documents is misplaced, as all statements have admittedly been furnished, and in an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nies Act, 2013. 13. While dismissing the earlier two petitions, being WP (C) 13057/2022 and WP (C) 14757/2023 vide judgment dated 16.08.2023, this Court observed that the submissions of the petitioner regarding her being unaware of the company's activities and her signing the agreement at the behest of her late husband and son cannot be accepted at this stage. 14. In the same Writ Petitions, vide previous order dated 13.12.2022, this Court observed that petitioner has refused to provide the bank account statements of her own bank accounts beyond two years period on the ground that bank statements pertaining to the period beyond two years cannot be fetched online and can only be obtained by her after submitting a request upon physically visiting the concerned branch of the bank. However, such an argument was turned down observing that most banking now a days is conducted online. The Court noted non-cooperation by the petitioner as the bank account statements beyond two years period were not being provided. The Court was also not satisfied with the authorized representatives as it was found that he was not having knowledge of the petitioner or her family dealings in order to ex....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....perience, held key positions in group companies, and could not feign ignorance of the transactions under investigation. These findings, which have attained finality, continue to govern the assessment of her credibility and the risk of her absconding. The petitioner cannot now selectively rely on the completion of investigation to seek relaxation of restrictions while ignoring the adverse findings regarding her past conduct. 18. Further, the plea of medical urgency does not persuade this Court. The petitioner has not been able to establish that the requested medical procedure, implantation of the MICRA AV device, is unavailable in India. On the contrary, the Respondent has pointed out that advanced cardiac treatment of this nature is readily accessible in India at several tertiary medical institutions of good reputation. The petitioner did not plead financial incapacity before the trial court, nor has she placed any medical opinion demonstrating that the procedure must necessarily be performed in the United Kingdom. In light of this, her claim to travel abroad on the mandate of Article 21 is untenable. As held in Mandhir Singh Todd v. ED (supra), when adequate treatment is availa....