9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (12) TMI 220X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by special leave has been filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation ("the CBI") questioning the order dated 15.02.2018 granting bail to the Respondent passed by the High Court of Orissa at Cuttack in BLAPL No. 5748 of 2016. 3. In compliance with the order dated 09.05.2014 passed by this Court in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 401 of 2013 in Subrata Chattoraj v. Union of India, the CBI registered an FIR vide Case No. RC10( S)/2014CBI/ SCB/Kol, dated 04.06.2014, against one Tower Infotech Ltd. ("the accused company"), and several persons in connection with the affairs of the company, including the Respondent Ramendu Chattopadhyay, the Chief Managing Director of the accused company, treating Baliapal PS (Dist. Balasore, Orissa) Case No. 85/20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assigning any reason, and such grant of bail by the High Court is in question in this petition. Per contra, Shri Basanth, learned Senior Counsel for the Respondent argues in support of the impugned order by contending that the Respondent has not misused his liberty and has not come in the way of selling of company assets by the OneMan Committee constituted for the purpose. On the contrary, it is submitted that the Respondent is cooperating with the investigation agencies and the OneMan Committee. 5. The records prima facie reveal that the Respondent was the founding director of the accused company. He was a key decisionmaking authority of the company, and used to sign certificates issued to the investors and other important documents. He ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .P. Talukdar, was appointed for this purpose. A letter dated 08.08.2019 written by Justice Talukdar, a copy of which was produced before this Court, reveals that no property of the Tower Group of companies has been sold by the OneMan Committee so far, and as a consequence, no amount has been deposited in the account of the OneMan Committee or returned to the investors. 7. It has also been brought to the notice of this Court that the Respondent, with the dishonest intention of deceiving and alluring investors, as well as agents and business developers, had got brochures of the Tower Group of companies published. In the aforesaid brochures, a letter was published in the name of Smt. Sheela Bhide, IAS, Chairman and Managing Director, India T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... off, as well as for the aforesaid reasons, the High Court, in our considered opinion, should not have released the Respondent on bail. 11. Consequently, the impugned order granting interim bail to the Respondent stands set aside. His bail bonds are cancelled. 12. The appeal is allowed accordingly. CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. OF 2019 (@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO. 462 OF 2019) Leave granted. 2. This appeal by special leave has been filed by the CBI questioning the order of the High Court of Orissa at Cuttack granting bail to the Respondent herein in BLAPL No. 1451 of 2017. 3. Since the facts emerging in this appeal are the same as in the criminal appeal arising out of S.L.P. (Crl.) No. 120 of 2019, they have not been referred ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
