They should be put to strict terms S.L.P.(Crl.) No.3343 of 2022 etc.
Yet, the respondent chose to pursue criminal charges in a quest to abuse the S.L.P.(Crl.) This unnecessary turning of a civil matter into a criminal case not only overburdens the criminal justice system but also violates the principles of fairness and right conduct in legal matters. Dinesh Gupta and Rajesh Gupta approached the High S.L.P.(Crl.) No.3343 of 2022 etc. The complainant further alleged that when he asked the accused to return the loan with interest, initially time was sought stating that there is slump in the real estate market and thereafter, the accused started ignoring the complainant. Accordingly, the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gautam Budh Nagar, vide order dated 15.02.2021 took cognizance and issued summons to the accused.
Also Read: https://newslaw.in/supreme-court/violation-of-judicial-discipline-case-summary/
The Chairman apprised the Board of Directors of the Company about the benefit of investment into the equity shares of M/s Verma Buildtech & Promoters Private Ltd offered by way of private placement.
The Chairman apprised the Board of Directors of the Company about the benefit of investment into the equity shares of M/S GULAB BUILDTECH PRIVATE LIMITED offered by way of private placement. “RESOLVED THAT the company be and is herewith authorized to make an investment of Rupees Five Crores Sixteen Lacs only (Rs.5, 16,00,000/-) in pursuance of the provision of the companies Act, 1956.” “RESOLVED FURTHER THAT Mr. Nearly one year after the amalgamation, on 31.01.2014, DD Global Capital Limited, the company of the complainant filed an application before the Delhi High Court seeking recall of the order of amalgamation passed by the High Court as it was without any notice to the company. More than two years after the application filed by the company was dismissed by Delhi High Court, the instant complaint was filed with the police at Gautam Budh Nagar, on the basis of which FIR in question was registered on 29.07.2018.
The aforesaid facts clearly establish that the idea was only to harass the appellants.
The aforesaid facts clearly establish that no case was made out against the appellants. Even the High Court S.L.P.(Crl.)
Also Read: https://newslaw.in/supreme-court/lack-of-sanction-under-pc-act-in-summoning-order/
No.3343 of 2022 etc. As a result of amalgamation, S.L.P.(Crl.)
No.3343 of 2022 etc. He also referred to the Balance Sheet of Gulab Buildtech and Verma Buildtech to show that the amount advanced by the complainant was shown in the column of ‘current liabilities’.
Though the complainant had invested crores of rupees in equity of the aforesaid two companies based at New Delhi, knowing well their place of business, yet in S.L.P.(Crl.) Whereas in the FIR, the addresses of all the accused given were incomplete merely mentioning the address as ‘Sector 20, Gautam Budh Nagar’, in the charge-sheet addresses of not only the appellants, namely, Rajesh Gupta and Dinesh Gupta, were found to be ‘D-393, New Friends Colony, New Delhi, even Sushil Gupta and Baljeet Singh were also found to be S.L.P.(Crl.) No.3343 of 2022 etc. Accused Company (Later amalgamated in BDR Builders) M/s Gulab Buildtech Pvt. Accused Company ( Later amalgamated in BDR Builders) M/s Verma Buildtech and Promoters Pvt.
Though address of Karan Gambhir who was of the complaint on the basis of FIR in question registered, was mentioned to be of Noida, same as was given in the complaint. The second person shown in the chargesheet is a supporting witness, Sanjay Gambhir, who has shown his present and permanent address of ‘P.S.
Coming to the allegation of the complainant being misled for advancing loan, which was later on converted into equity, the appellants placed on record two resolutions dated 25.03.2011 and 26.08.2011 passed by the company vide which decision was taken by the complainant to invest in the equity of Gulab Buildtech and Verma Buildtech to the tune of 5,16,00,000/- and 11,29,50,000/- respectively.
Also Read: https://newslaw.in/supreme-court/non-compliance-of-undertaking-in-a-negotiable-instruments-act-case/
considering the material placed on record, the High Court allowed the merger application on 20.02.2013, as a result of which Gulab Buildtech and Verma Buildtech were merged into BDR. It was also nowhere pleaded in the application that the shares held by the company were mortgaged to Sushil Gupta by forging the documents.
Not only this, despite dismissal of the application filed by the complainant for recall of the merger order by the High Court vide order dated 15.03.2016, in the complaint made to the S.L.P.(Crl.) No.3343 of 2022 etc. However, even after dismissal of the application filed for recall of the merger order passed by the High Court on 15.03.2016, no steps were taken to recover the amount, except getting the FIR registered more than two years later. The impugned order passed by the High Court is set aside. FIR No.1271 of 2018 dated 29.07.2018 registered with Gautam Budh Nagar Police Station, Noida, and all subsequent proceedings thereof qua the appellants are quashed. Thus, we find ourselves constrained to impose cost on Complainant with a view to curb others from such acts leading to abuse of judicial remedies.
Case Title: DINESH GUPTA Vs. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH (2024 INSC 32)
Case Number: Crl.A. No.-000214-000214 / 2024
