TMI Blog2023 (9) TMI 1104X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... buse of the process of law. Once an investigation has been initiated by the SFIO under Section 212 of the 2013 Act, a parallel investigation by a separate agency into the affairs of the Company, considering the bar under Section 212(2), is not permissible. As per the facts involved herein, admittedly, the SFIO had already filed numerous Interim Report(s) before this Court and before NCLT. The only difference between the first complaint resulting in the SFIO proceedings made by respondent no. 2 and the second complaint resulting in the registration of the impugned FIR also made by the respondent no. 2 is that the said respondent in the end of the complaint has instead of using the words cannot be done by any other agency except SFIO Department in the initial complaint made to the MCA cleverly replaced it with the words cannot be done by any other agency except EOW with a view to include Section(s) 406/ 420/ 120B IPC, since the offence of fraud per-se does not find mention in the IPC. The same, in the opinion of this Court, does not make an iota of difference as it seems to be a deliberate act. As such, the respondent no. 2 cannot be given any benefit of the same. It is t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... disposed off. - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAURABH BANERJEE For the Petitioner Through: Mr. Sudhir Nandrajog Sr. Advocate and Mr. Preetesh Kapur, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Nistha Gupta, Mr. Prateek Singh Kundu, Mr. Shaunak Kashyap, Mr. Kanav Agarwal, Mr. Manan Takkar and Ms. Aditi Prakash, Advocates For the Respondents Through: Mr. Ajay Vikram Singh, APP for the State with Inspector Sandeep Maan, P.S.: EOW Mr. Pramod Kumar Dubey, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Indresh Upadhyay, Mr. Brijesh Upadhyay, Mr. Satyam Sharma, Ms. Aditi, Mr. Kanush Dhawan and Mr. Amit Negi, Advocates for intervenors. Mr. Satya Prakash Yadav, Advocate for R-2. Mr. Rajiv Dawar and Mr. Sameer Dawar, Advocates for R-3 Mr. Praveen Mahajan and Mr. Bhavya Manchanda, Advocates for impleaders Mr. Rohit Kathuria, Mr. Dhruv Verma and Mr. Sagar Chauhan, Advocates for R-4 to 11 JUDGMENT PREMISE: 1. By way of the present petition under Section 482 of the Code of the Criminal Procedure, 1973 [ Cr.P.C. ], the petitioner is seeking quashing of FIR no. 06/2023 dated 12.01.2023 registered under Section(s) 406/420/120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 [ IPC ] at P.S. Economic Offences Wing, New Delhi [ EOW ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ling for inspection of records of the WTC group of Companies under Section 206(5) of The Companies Act, 2013 [ the 2013 Act .] whereafter the MCA issued an order authorising and assigning the SFIO to conduct investigation into the affairs of the said company WTC Noida under Section 212 of the 2013 Act on 14.10.2021. 5. In the interregnum, respondent no. 2 made another complaint to The Commissioner of Police, Delhi and the EOW via e-mail on 15.08.2021 under the Subject : Complaint against fraudulent and illegal siphoning of funds running into more than 1500 crores to various companies in India and Abroad through web of shell companies out of collection of Funds illegally, running into thousands of crores of Rupees by way of running Ponzi Scheme in the name of illegal Assured Return in the guise of real estate projects in Gujarat, Uttar Pradesh, Punjab Haryana against the Accused: WTC group of companies where ownership vests with one Ashish Bhalla or his family members lie Abhijeet Bhalla, Suparna Bhalla through complicated web of Shell companies but Ashish Bhalla and his family members do not become directors to avoid legal liabilities. Following Companies besides ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iled by other complainants. Moreover, in any event the complainant does not have a locus to file the impugned FIR since the issue therein is pertaining to a Project involving WTC Noida wherein, the complainant is neither a connected party therein nor an investor in WTC group of Companies. 9. Based thereupon, the petitioner by way of the present petition has sought the following reliefs:- a. Pass an order thereby allowing the present petition and quash the FIR no. 06/ 2023 dated 12.01.2023 registered at P.S. Economic Offences Wing, New Delhi under Section(s) 406, 420 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and/ or all other proceedings/ investigations arising thereto and/or; b. Pass an order staying the operation and effect of impugned FIR bearing No. 06/2023, and any other proceeding arising therefrom, pending final adjudication of the accompanying petition, and/or; c. Pass an order thereby directing that no coercive steps be taken against the Petitioner by the concerned investigating authorities/agencies in respect of the FIR No. 06/2023 dated 12.01.2023 registered at P.S. Economic Offences Wing, New Delhi, pending the final adjudication of the accompanying peti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... made in the impugned FIR are all contained in/ covered by the provisions of the 2013 Act, there cannot be any fresh investigation by EOW, as it was not required. 13.3. The offences in the impugned FIR cannot be segregated from the offences finding mention in the 2013 Act. Thus, the investigation by both SFIO and EOW cannot continue and if allowed to continue, the same shall amount to a gross abuse of the process of law. 13.4. The 2013 Act is a complete special Code in itself enumerating the procedure(s) of investigation under Section 212 thereof. As such, the proceedings emanating under the said 2013 Act, will take precedence over the Cr.P.C. Reliance for the said proposition was placed upon Serious Fraud Investigation Office vs. Rahul Modi Anr. (2019) 5 SCC 266; Doraisamy Anr vs. Sate 2019 SCC OnLine Mad 1354 and Sunair Hotels Ltd. vs. Union of India 2019 SCC OnLine Del 6465. 13.5. The investigation had already been ordered by MCA on 14.10.2021 whereby SFIO is to look into the ... ... affairs of a company... ... based on the complaint dated 14.06.2021 made by the respondent no. 2 as also another one dated 03.08.2021 made by Mr. Sunil Gandhi. It is thereafter ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 28.11.2022; and 13.12. Attention of this Court was drawn to the Site Inspection Report filed before NCLT proceedings in C.P. 156 of 2022 to show the significant construction work which has already been completed in the various project(s). CASE OF RESPONDENT NOS. 4 TO 34, 38 39 SUPPORTING PETITIONER: 14. In support of the contentions advanced by learned senior counsels appearing for the petitioner, learned senior counsel Mr. Promod Kumar Dubey appearing for the newly impleaded respondent nos.4 to 34, 38 and 39 argued as under:- 14.1. The investigation in the impugned FIR cannot go independently since fraud is the major offence under the 2013 Act and the offences under the IPC in Chapter XVII are subsets of it. Thus, SFIO is the correct statutory authority to investigate the same and the impugned FIR cannot subsist before EOW as it has no role to play. Moreover, the allegations in the impugned FIR are of a fraud allegedly committed by the petitioner herein. 14.2. If the complaint under investigation by SFIO and the impugned FIR under investigation by EOW are allowed to continue at the same time, it will tantamount to abuse of the process of law. Relianc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion from other agencies than the SFIO. Reliance for the said proposition was placed upon Rahul Modi (supra). 16.2. Simultaneous investigations can continue while investigation and proceeding are pending before SFIO. Reliance for this proposition was placed upon order(s) passed by this Court in Jaskaran Singh Chawla vs. Union of India Ors. W.P.(Crl.) 246/2022 dated 03.11.2022 Delhi High Court; Ranvir Singh vs Union of India Ors. W.P.(C) 818/2023 dated 25.04.2016 Delhi High Court and Subhash Khandelwal vs EOW Ors. W.P.(Crl.) 1894/2020 dated 18.12.2020 Delhi High Court. 16.3. The affairs of a Company are different from the tasks of a Company and the punishment awarded under the 2013 Act is far less than what is awarded for offences mentioned in Chapter XVII of the IPC. 16.4. While interpreting a Statute if two meanings are permissible, a Court ought to resolve the ambiguity and carve out a meaning which is consistent with the provisions of the Statute taking into account the consequences of alternative constructions. Reliance for this proposition was placed upon Anant Thanur Karmuse vs. State of Maharashtra (2023) 5 SCC 802. 16.5. In any event, applying the p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Cr.P.C.; [ii] the power of an Investigating Officer, including power to arrest is different from that of the Police, in SFIO proceeding; and [iii] the offences under the 2013 Act are non-cognizable offences whereas those under the IPC are involving cognizable as well as non-cognizable offences. 17.4. The provisions of 2013 Act do not specifically bar institution of criminal proceedings under other relevant penal Sections of the IPC before a different forum. 17.5. Section 26 of the General Clauses Act, 1987 permits prosecution under two different enactments where any act or omission constitutes an offence under two or more enactments. It is well settled that the same set of facts, in conceivable cases, can constitute offences under two different enactments and parallel investigation can go on under the two different enactments. Reliance for this proposition was placed upon State of Maharashtra Anr. vs. Sayyed Hassan Sayyad Subhan Ors. (2019) 18 SCC 145. 17.6. In any event, the offences mentioned in the complaint made to the MCA resulting in the initiation of proceedings before SFIO and those made in the subsequent complaint resulting in the registration of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... int dated 14.06.2021 to the MCA and in the second complaint dated 15.08.2021 to the EOW are similar/ same involving the same set of facts containing the same allegations made against the same individual(s) by the same complainant? and; (iii) What are the effects of the provisions contained in Section 212 of the 2013 Act upon the factual matrix of the case? MAINTAINABILITY QUA LEGAL ISSUE NOT BEING PLEADED: 20. Prior to adverting to the factual matrix involved, this Court is of the opinion that it would be prudent and in the interest of justice to set out a vital question of law with respect to an objection raised by the respondent no. 2 qua there being no ground taken by the petitioner about any parallel proceedings in the form of the impugned FIR before EOW, in view of the pending SFIO proceedings, calling for dismissal of the present petition. 21. Since the aforesaid objection has a material bearing upon the position in the present circumstances as they stand today, which is primarily based on the interpretation and applicability of Section 212 of the 2013 Act, despite, there being no direct reference thereto in the pleadings before this Court. 22. It is a m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... somewhere in late 1990 s/ early 2000 s, the Central Government, identifying the various undercurrents and turbulence in the Indian economy with changing times, where on one hand privatisation was playing a pivotal role while on the other hand scams involving economic frauds like the stock markets or entities started foraying in, set up a high-level Committee of Corporate Affairs on 21.08.2002 to make the ends meet. 26. It was based upon the suggestions of the said Committee of Corporate Affairs that the Central Government proceeded ahead to repeal the earlier 1956 Act and introduced the 2013 Act setting up Serious Fraud Investigation Office [already referred to as the SFIO ] demarcating/ defining/ assigning wider role(s), step(s), specification(s), procedure(s) and purpose(s) to it than what they were under Section(s) 235, 237, 239 and 247 of 1956 Act 1 . The 2013 Act, not only introduced but, in fact, gave a new lease of life, as it was able to infuse a new dimension to SFIO proceedings. SECTION 447 OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013: 27. Section 447 of the 2013 Act plays a very pivotal role in SFIO proceedings as much depends upon the phraseology and the interpr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct. Additionally, the Central Government may also direct inspection of books and papers of the Company and to carry out the inspection of books of account of an entity or class of entities. As stated in Section 206 of the 2013 Act, in case of any default of the above, the Company shall be punishable. 29. Section 207 of the 2013 Act is relating to the conduct of inspection and inquiry by a Registrar on the basis of information derived under Section 206 of the 2013 Act hereinabove. It is also specified therein that the Registrar or Inspector making an inspection or inquiry shall have all the same powers as that of a Civil Court under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 qua matters finding mention under Section 207(3)(a c) of the 2013 Act. 30. Section 208 of the 2013 Act pertains to a written report to be made by the Registrar or the Inspector to the Central Government along with such documents wherein, if required, further investigation into the affairs of the Company can also be called for. Thus, it is incumbent upon the Registrar or the Inspector, as the case may be, to make/ give a report to the Central Government. 31. Section 209 of the 2013 Act empowers such Registrar or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the SFIO on different factors prescribed therein, it shall assign investigation into the affairs of a Company to the SFIO. As per Section 212(2) of the 2013 Act, if the Central Government assigns any case to the SFIO, no other investigating agency shall investigate qua any offences under this Act and further the investigation, if initiated, shall not proceed further and as the relevant documents and records in respect of such offences under this Act shall stand transferred to the SFIO. 36. As per Section 212(3) of the 2013 Act, once the Central Government assigns the investigation to the SFIO, the investigation thereof shall be conducted in the manner and procedure provided therein and SFIO shall submit its report to the Central Government within the allotted time, if any. 37. As per Section 212(4) of the 2013 Act, an Investigating Officer shall investigate into the affairs of the company and shall have the powers of an Inspector under Section 217 of the 2013 Act. 38. As per Section 212(5) of the 2013 Act, the Company, including its past and present officers and employees, shall provide all information, explanation, documents and a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5. As specified in Section 212(15) of the 2013 Act that irrespective of what is contained in the 2013 Act or any other law, the Investigation Report filed with the Special Court for framing of charges shall be deemed to be treated as a Report filed by a Police Officer under Section 173 Cr.P.C. 46. It is thence that as per Section 212(16) of the 2013 Act, irrespective of what is contained in the 2013 Act, any investigation or other action taken or initiated by the SFIO under the Companies Act, 1956 shall continue to proceed under that Act. 47. Thereafter, as per Section 212(17)(a), while the SFIO has been investigating any offence under this Act, if there is/ are any other investigating agency, State Government, Police Authority, Income-Tax Authorities having any information or documents in respect of such offence then such other investigation agency is bound to provide all such information or documents available with it to the SFIO. 48. Last, but not the least, as per Section 212(17)(b) of the 2013 Act, the SFIO is also bound to share any information or documents available with it with any investigating agency, State Government, Police Authority or Income-Ta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a path has been demarcated for the SFIO proceedings to continue further. 54. It is reiterated that in the opinion of this Court, the enactment of the 2013 Act being a special piece of legislation is not in derogation of the Cr.P.C. which is a general piece of legislation. The same is reinforced from the fact that they both and the proceedings emanating therefrom are very much co-existing and operating though in different spheres but before the same Special Court together [infra Para 79] . In fact, in the opinion of this Court, going by what is contained in Section 209, 212(7) and 436(2) of the 2013 Act, the provisions of Cr.P.C. are very much applicable to the SFIO proceedings. This is despite the fact that the SFIO proceedings are different and are conducted by a specialized team comprising of persons of ability, integrity and experience as per Section 211 of the 2013 Act. [Id. Para 33.]. SECTION 36 OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013: 55. Section 36 of the 2013 Act which plays a pivotal role, provides for punishment in case anyone is found to be fraudulently inducing persons to invest money, is of utmost significance as the issues involved in the present case al ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... held or knowingly misapplied the benefits derived from such property or cash for imprisonment for the period provided therein. However, the aforesaid imprisonment is not to be ordered subject to satisfaction of the Court, where the amounts are related to what are specified therein. SFIO PROCEEDINGS VERSUS THE IMPUGNED FIR: 58. It is in view of the aforesaid that this Court is to determine the legitimacy of the impugned FIR registered pursuant to the making of the second complainant dated 15.08.2021 in view of the pending SFIO proceedings initiated by the Central Government on 14.10.2021 under Section 212 of the 2013 Act pursuant to making of the first complaint dated 14.06.2021. Thus, what is to be seen is the question of filing, continuance and prosecution of the proceedings before EOW. When those before the SFIO are already in subsistence is indeed a matter of concern calling for adjudication by this Court. 59. For determining the same, this Court has to keep in mind that the legislature in its wisdom, while taking into consideration the earlier facts, complexities involved and the types of cases arising which were all primarily including fraud , has especially incl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hus a vast power to investigate and enquire into the affairs of the Company once it has been given a green signal by the Central Government. 62. As discussed earlier, Section 212(2) deals with a situation wherein whilst an investigating agency of the Central Government or State Government is seized of a case and the SFIO is assigned the case under Section 212(1) of the 2013 Act, thereafter such agency not being SFIO shall not proceed further with the investigation, particularly, if such investigation is pertaining not only to the offences under the 2013 Act but also is in respect of any offence under this Act meaning thereby that once SFIO is seized of a case to look into the affairs of a Company, all such (pending) cases with other investigating authorities investigating cases under other laws having relation to/ directly related to offences under the Companies Act, 2013 have to be transferred to the SFIO. 63. Furthermore, as already opined, Section 212 of the 2013 Act is a complete code in itself wherein all the provisions contained therein are, not only interdependent upon each other and thus have to be harmoniously read together conjointly with each other, especi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wherein the Hon ble Supreme Court has held as under :- 14. The cardinal rule of construction of the provisions of a section with a proviso is succinctly stated in Maxwell's Interpretation of Statutes, 10th Edn., at p. 162 thus: The proper course is to apply the broad general rule of construction, which is that a section or enactment must be construed as a whole, each portion throwing light if need be on the rest. The true principle undoubtedly is, that the sound interpretation and meaning of the statute, on a view of the enacting clause, saving clause, and proviso, taken and construed together is to prevail. Unless the words are clear, the court should not so construe the proviso as to attribute an intention to the legislature to give with one hand and take away with another. To put it in other words, a sincere attempt should be made to reconcile the enacting clause and the proviso and to avoid repugnancy between the two. 66. Thus, in the opinion of this Court, a holistic reading of the aforesaid provisions contained in Section(s) 212(2) and 212(17)(a) of the 2013 Act, the only conclusion possible to be drawn is that after any transfer as per Se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... icularly if there are diverse decisions/ outcome from two or more different sets of proceedings. The same would tantamount to sheer abuse of the process of law. Once an investigation has been initiated by the SFIO under Section 212 of the 2013 Act, a parallel investigation by a separate agency into the affairs of the Company, considering the bar under Section 212(2), is not permissible. As per the facts involved herein, admittedly, the SFIO had already filed numerous Interim Report(s) before this Court and before NCLT. 69. Taking note of all the aforesaid as they stand today, in the opinion of this Court, there is no reason for the subsequent impugned FIR before the EOW to continue. 70. Furthermore, in terms of the provisions of Section 212 of the 2013 Act, it is clear that the word assign used in Section 212(3) means a total assignment to the SFIO for looking into the affairs of the company as the same means to include within itself each and everything connected with the Company and all past and present officials engaged with it. The assignment of an investigation into the affairs of the company is of widest amplitude, moreover, considering in respect of any offenc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Section 212 confer powers on the Central Government to order an investigation on almost similar grounds as enumerated in the three sub-clauses. An investigation under Section 210 can be conducted by investigating officers appointed by the Government, who derive their powers of investigation from Section 217. On the other hand, it is important to note that the SFIO is a body comprising experts in the field of forensic audits, taxation, banking etc. Further, the SFIO derives its powers of investigation under Section 212 and has been given far greater powers to investigate the affairs of the company, rather than that would be available to investigations conducted under Section 210. For instance, when a case has been assigned to the SFIO, no other agency may investigate the affairs of the company and all files concerning the affairs of the company should be transferred to the SFIO. Further, certain offences if discovered in the course of an SFIO investigation, bail would only be made available at a much higher threshold than under Section 437 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The SFIO is also bestowed with greater powers of arrest. Upon completion of the investigations by the SFIO it mu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inst fraudulent and illegal siphoning of funds running into more than 1500 crores to various companies in India and Abroad through web of shell companies out of collection of Funds illegally, running into thousands of crores of Rupees by way of running Ponzi Scheme in the name of illegal Assured Return in the guise of real estate project s in Gujarat, Uttar Pradesh, Punjab Haryana. Subject : Complaint against fraudulent and illegal siphoning of funds running into more than 1500 crores to various companies in India and Abroad through web of shell companies out of collection of Funds illegally, running into thousands of crores of Rupees by way of running Ponzi Scheme in the name of illegal Assured Return in the guise of real estate projects in Gujarat, Uttar Pradesh, Punjab Haryana. Accused : WTC group of companies where ownership vests with one Ashish Bhalla or his family members lie Abhijeet Bhalla, Suparna Bhalla through complicated web of Shell companies but Ashish Bhalla and his family members do not become directors to avoid legal liabilities. Following Companies besides more than 100 additional shell Companies form part of WTC ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... panies Act, etc. It is worth noting that the active participation of WTCA in the instant fraud, duping thousands of gullible investors, is apparent from the fact that every project (including residential where WTCA is not even authorized to grant franchise, as per their own constitution/byelaws) launched by Ashish Bhalla's group of companies bear the name of 'WTC or 'World Trade Center' for the purpose of betraying gullible investors who always get captivated by WTC Brand's glare dazzle. In essence WTCA is actively involved in defrauding investors in India alongside Ashish Bhalla. Infact, instant fraud explained hereinafter involves complex, multi-disciplinary ramifications while having serious public interest at stake due to the sheer magnitude of money laundering involved, apart from various other aspects. It is worth noting that the accused have collected more than Rs. 5,000 Crores and have also siphoned/misappropriated the same due to lackadaisical approach of authorities First two paragraphs: The present complaint is being made in respect of a massive financial fraud committed by WTC Group. The said group is owned by one Ashish Bhalla in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ic PART II: Siphoning of Funds Collected From General Public Instead of Completing Construction PART III: Defrauding Investors By Dodging Evading Payment of Assured Returns, While also Indulging Into Theft of Tax as Well as its Abetment PART IV: Bullet Points (Conclusion) It is sufficient to say that due to the nature of facts involved, it is Incumbent to Involve experts from the field of accountancy, forensic auditing, law, Information technology, investigation company law, capital market and taxation for investigating the present case which cannot be done by any other agency except SFIO Department. As such it is prayed that your good self may kindly register my complaint against all accused companies as it is clear from all above that the sole objective is to run and operate illegal Ponzi Schemes and Serious Fraud with public at large. These frauds are punishable under Companies Act, Income Tax Act, GST Act, Indian Penal Code, RERA, SEBI A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gation in the impugned FIR. 76. The only difference between the first complaint resulting in the SFIO proceedings made by respondent no. 2 and the second complaint resulting in the registration of the impugned FIR also made by the respondent no. 2 is that the said respondent in the end of the complaint has instead of using the words cannot be done by any other agency except SFIO Department in the initial complaint made to the MCA cleverly replaced it with the words cannot be done by any other agency except EOW with a view to include Section(s) 406/ 420/ 120B IPC, since the offence of fraud per-se does not find mention in the IPC. The same, in the opinion of this Court, does not make an iota of difference as it seems to be a deliberate act. As such, the respondent no. 2 cannot be given any benefit of the same. 77. In any event, it is thus not in dispute that the allegations made in the impugned FIR had all been mentioned and contained in the first complaint made by the respondent no. 2 before the MCA which thence resulted in instillation of the SFIO proceedings against the petitioner. The same is/ are encapsulated the table below for giving a better elucidati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... amounts to act and omission to gain undue advantage from investors and allottees. Section 448: Falsification of financial statements and account books. Section 452: Allegations amounts to wrongfully utilizing property of company (including cash) or the purposes other than those expressed or directed in the articles and authorised by the 2013 Act. Giving unsecured loans to related parties to the tune of Rs. 500 crores. Section 447 [Explanation (i)]: Allegation amounts to act and omission to gain undue advantage from investors and allottees. Section 452: Allegations amounts to wrongfully utilizing property of company (including cash) or the purposes other than those expressed or directed in the articles and authorised by the 2013 Act. The Assured Returns model being a Ponzi scheme. Money taken from old investors is given as assured returns to new investors instead of being utilized in construction. Section 447 [Explanation (i)]: Allegation amounts to act with intention to deceive and to gain undue advantage from investors and allotees. Section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (1992) Supp (1) SCC 335 wherein the Hon ble Supreme Court has held as under:- 102. (1) Where the allegations made in the first information report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused. (2) Where the allegations in the first information report and other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code. (3) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused. (4) Where the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under Section 155(2) of the Code. (5) Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... court and the issues involved, whether factual or legal, are of such magnitude that they cannot be seen in their true perspective without sufficient material. Of course, no hard-and-fast rule can be laid down in regard to cases in which the High Court will exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction of quashing the proceedings at any stage. 22. In Indian Oil Corpn. v. NEPC India Ltd. [Indian Oil Corpn. v. NEPC India Ltd., (2006) 6 SCC 736 : (2006) 3 SCC (Cri) 188] , a two-Judge Bench of this Court reviewed the precedents on the exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 and formulated guiding principles in the following terms : (SCC p. 748, para 12) 12. (i) A complaint can be quashed where the allegations made in the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety, do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out the case alleged against the accused. For this purpose, the complaint has to be examined as a whole, but without examining the merits of the allegations. Neither a detailed inquiry nor a meticulous analysis of the material nor an assessment of the reliability or genuineness of the al ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... abuse of the process of the Court or that the ends of justice require that the proceeding ought to be quashed. In para 7 of the judgment, the following has been stated: 7. In the exercise of this wholesome power, the High Court is entitled to quash a proceeding if it comes to the conclusion that allowing the proceeding to continue would be an abuse of the process of the court or that the ends of justice require that the proceeding ought to be quashed. The saving of the High Court's inherent powers, both in civil and criminal matters, is designed to achieve a salutary public purpose which is that a court proceeding ought not to be permitted to degenerate into a weapon of harassment or persecution. In a criminal case, the veiled object behind a lame prosecution, the very nature of the material on which the structure of the prosecution rests and the like would justify the High Court in quashing the proceeding in the interest of justice. The ends of justice are higher than the ends of mere law though justice has got to be administered according to laws made by the legislature. The compelling necessity for making these observations is that without a proper realisation of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a 102 in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal as under: 102. In the backdrop of the interpretation of the various relevant provisions of the Code under Chapter XIV and of the principles of law enunciated by this Court in a series of decisions relating to the exercise of the extraordinary power under Article 226 or the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code which we have extracted and reproduced above, we give the following categories of cases by way of illustration wherein such power could be exercised either to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice, though it may not be possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined and sufficiently channelised and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such power should be exercised. (1) Where the allegations made in the first information report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused. (2) Where the allegations in the first information report and other materials, if any, accompanying ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reme Court has held as under:- 11. Mr S.V. Raju, learned Additional Solicitor General made a subtle attempt to contend that the power of seizure is available under Section 102 CrPC, which has been exercised and as such the freezing of the account would remain valid. We are unable to appreciate and accept such contention for more than one reason. Firstly, as noted, it has been the contention of Respondent 4 that the PMLA is a standalone enactment. If that be so and when such enactment contains a provision for seizure which includes freezing, the power available therein is to be exercised and the procedure contemplated therein is to be complied with. Secondly, when the power is available under the special enactment, the question of resorting to the power under the general law does not arise. Thirdly, the power under Section 102 CrPC is to the police officer during the course of investigation and the scheme of the provision is different from the scheme under the PMLA. Further, even sub-section (3) to Section 102 CrPC requires that the police officer shall forthwith report the seizure to the Magistrate having jurisdiction, the compliance with which is also not shown if the said pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d by construction, the approach suggested by Lord Coke in Heydon case [(1584) 3 Rep 7b], yield better results: To arrive at the real meaning, it is always necessary to get an exact conception of the aim, scope, and object of the whole Act : to consider, according to Lord Coke : (1) What was the law before the Act was passed; (2) What was the mischief or defect for which the law had not provided; (3) What remedy Parliament has appointed; and (4) The reason of the remedy. With these rules of construction in mind, let us now tackle the problem raised in this case. Under Section 34(1)(a), after it was amended by the Finance Act, 1956, a notice in respect of an escaped concealed income could be issued at any time. The terms of clause (a) and the expression at any time are clear and unambiguous and, if there is nothing in the Act detracting from the width of the said terms, it is clear that a notice can be issued at any time in respect of the concealed income of any year not being a year ending before March 31, 1941. But Section 34(1-A) provides for the issue of notice in respect of escaped income of the previous years within the period beginning on Se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Act, notice under sub-section (1)(a) might be issued at any time notwithstanding that at the time of the issue of notice the period of 8 years specified in that sub-section before its amendment by the Finance Act, 1956, had expired in respect of the year to which the notice related. This amendment was necessitated by the judgments of the Bombay and Calcutta High Courts in Debi Dutt v. T. Belan [(1959) 35 ITR 781] and S.C. Prashar v. Vasantsen [(1956) 29 ITR 857] respectively holding that if the right of the Income Tax Officer to reopen an assessment was barred under the law for the time being in force, no subsequent enlargement of the time could revive such right in the absence of press words or necessary intendment. Sub-section (4) was added to Section 34 to make it abundantly clear that notice under Section 34(1)(a) could be issued at any time notwithstanding that the said right was barred before the Amendment Act of 1956. This history of the legislation leaves no room for doubt that the intention of the legislature was to bring the escaped concealed income of rupees one lakh and more to tax without any time limit. Before the 1956 Act was passed, the period of limitation prescr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es contained in the part is repugnant to a provision in the Special Rules applicable to any particular service contained in Part III, the latter shall in respect of that service, prevail over the provision in the General Rules in this part. Therefore, the provision of the Special Rules [Note (2) under Entry 5 of the Table] will prevail over the provision of the General Rules [Note (3) under Rule 5]. Even without such a specific provision, contextually, the said later special rule would have prevailed over the said prior general rule. 14. The question whether there can be an exception to the primacy given to the Special Rules by Rule 2 of the General Rules, was considered by this Court in S. Prakash [(1999) 5 SCC 624 : 1999 SCC (L S) 997] and Prasad Kurien [(2008) 3 SCC 529 : (2008) 1 SCC (L S) 856], with particular reference to Note (3) to Rule 5 of the General Rules. 15. In S. Prakash [(1999) 5 SCC 624 : 1999 SCC (L S) 997], this Court considered whether the provisions of the Special Rules, the Kerala Agricultural Income Tax and Sales Tax Service Rules, will have to yield to Note (3) to Rule 5 of the General Rules. This Court held: (SCC pp. 633-34, para 14) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Special Rules that were earlier in point of time to the General Rules as amended by the 1992 Amendment rules which introduced Note (3) to Rule 5 of the General Rules. 19. This Court held, on reading the General Rules in conjunction with the Special Rules, that Note (3) to Rule 5 of General Rules will prevail over the corresponding provisions in the Special Rules showing a different intention, when deciding whether the ratio of each feeder category should be determined with reference to the cadre strength or existing vacancies. 20. What logically follows from the principle enunciated in the two decisions is that if any special rule is subsequent to the general rule, then the question of examining whether the prior general rule will prevail over a later special rule will not arise at all having regard to the categorical provision contained in Rule 2 of the General Rules. The principle laid down in those decisions will not apply where the special rule is made subsequent to the general rule. 80. It is thus notable that the SFIO proceedings are primarily governed by what is enumerated in the relevant provisions of Section 212 and Section 447 of the 2013 Act in addition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d, the legislation would have contemplated certain results including retransfer of investigation back to the original investigating agencies which were directed to transfer the entire record under sub-section (2) of Section 212. In the absence of any clear stipulation, in our view, an interpretation that with the expiry of the period, the mandate in favour of SFIO must come to an end, will cause great violence to the scheme of legislation. If such interpretation is accepted, with the transfer of investigation in terms of sub-section (2) of Section 212 the original investigating agencies would be denuded of the power to investigate and with the expiry of mandate SFIO would also be powerless which would lead to an incongruous situation that serious frauds would remain beyond investigation. That could never have been the idea. The only construction which is possible, therefore, is that the prescription of period within which a report has to be submitted to the Central Government under sub-section (3) of Section 212 is purely directory. Even after the expiry of such stipulated period, the mandate in favour of SFIO and the assignment of investigation under sub-section (1) would not come ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to fresh investigation by the police in respect of the same incident, giving rise to one or more cognizable offences, consequent upon filing of successive FIRs whether before or after filing the final report under Section 173(2) CrPC. It would clearly be beyond the purview of Sections 154 and 156 CrPC, nay, a case of abuse of the statutory power of investigation in a given case. In our view a case of fresh investigation based on the second or successive FIRs, not being a counter-case, filed in connection with the same or connected cognizable offence alleged to have been committed in the course of the same transaction and in respect of which pursuant to the first FIR either investigation is under way or final report under Section 173(2) has been forwarded to the Magistrate, may be a fit case for exercise of power under Section 482 CrPC or under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution. FATE OF IMPUGNED FIR ON SAME FACTS VERSUS THE FIRST COMPLAINT: 82. Admittedly, this is a case involving FIR No. 06/2023 dated 12.01.2023 registered under Section(s) 406/420/120-B IPC at P.S. EOW, New Delhi and complaint dated 14.06.2021 made to the MCA, and SFIO proceedings initiated by the C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e field of administrative law by invoking and by applying these principles which we broadly classify under the designation of natural justice. Many testing problems as to their application yet re-remain to be solved. But I affirm that the area of administrative action is but one area in which the principles are to be deployed. Nor are they to be invoked only when procedural failures are shown. Does natural justice qualify to be described as a majestic conception? I believe it does. Is it just a rhetorical but vague phrase which can be employed, when needed, to give a gloss of assurance? I believe that it is very much more. If it can be summarised as being fair- play in action who could wish that it would ever be out of action? It denotes that the law is not only to be guided by reason and by logic but that its purpose will not be fulfilled; it lacks more exalted inspiration. [ Current Legal Problems, 1973, Vol. 26, p. 16] And then again, in his speech in the House of Lords in Wiseman v. Borneman [1971 AC 297 : (1969) 3 All ER 275] the learned Law Lord said in words of inspired felicity: ... that the conception of natural justice should at all stages guide those w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the particular circumstances of the case, the Tribunal acted unfairly so that it could be said that their procedure did not match with what justice demanded , or, was the procedure adopted by the Tribunal in all the circumstances unfair? The test adopted by every Law Lord was whether the procedure followed was fair in all the circumstances and fair-play in action required that an opportunity should be given to the taxpayer to see and reply to the counter-statement of the Commissioners before reaching the conclusion that there is a prima facie case against him . The inquiry must, therefore, always be : does fairness in action demand that an opportunity to be heard should be given to the person affected? 85. In the opinion of this Court, especially in view of what is contained above herein, it would be a travesty of justice and a gross abuse of the process of law, if the impugned FIR is allowed to co-exist and be proceeded with simultaneously along with the SFIO proceedings as the same would tantamount to vexing the petitioner twice because he will be subjected twice over again and that too by two different agencies at the same time for the same offence. This cannot be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the petitioner-company who claims of having been subjected to fraud. The investigation in FIR No. 213/2020 registered at Police Station Shah- janpur District Bhiwadi is, therefore, transferred to the SFIO. The Investigation Officer in FIR No. 213/2020 shall handover all details as required to the SFIO. Reliance is further placed upon the judgment dated 04.01.2023 in SLP(Crl.) No. 7325/2022 entitled Anil Hiralal Shah vs State of Rajasthan wherein the challenge was made to Stepping Stone (supra) wherein the Hon ble Supreme Court has upheld the same while holding as under:- .Our attention has been drawn to the provisions of sub Section(2) of Section 210 of the 2013 Act, which stipulates that where an order is passed by a Court or Tribunal in any proceeding before it that the affairs of a company ought to be investigated, the Central Government shall order an investigation into the affairs of that company. This provision applies to proceedings arising out of complaints of illegalities of corporate entities, and the requirement that it would be for the Central Government to order investigation would not apply to cases of this nature. It is our opinion that it would ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or executes a document or part of a document, or makes any mark denoting the execution of a document, with the intention of causing it to be believed that such document/or part of a document was made, signed, sealed or executed by or by the authority of a person by whom or by whose authority he knows that it was not made, signed, sealed or executed, or at a time at which he knows that it was not made, signed, sealed or executed; or *** The definition of false document is a part of the definition of forgery . Both must be read together. If so read, the ingredients of the offence of forgery relevant to the present enquiry are as follows: (1) fraudulently signing a document or a part of a document with an intention of causing it to be believed that such document or part of a document was signed by another or under his authority; (2) making of such a document with an intention to commit fraud or that fraud may be committed. In the two definitions, both mens rea described in Section 464 i.e. fraudulently and the intention to commit fraud in Section 463 have the same meaning. This redundancy has perhaps become necessary as the element of fraud is not the ing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oth need not co-exist. xxxx 7. The classic definition of the word fraudulently is found in Stephen's History of the Criminal Law of England, Vol. 2, at p. 121 and it reads: I shall not attempt to construct a definition which will meet every case which might be suggested, but there is little danger in saying that whenever the words fraud or intent to defraud or fraudulently occur in the definition of a crime two elements at least are essential to the commission of the crime : namely, first, deceit or an intention to deceive or in some cases mere secrecy; and secondly, either actual injury possible in jury or to a risk of possible injury by means of that deceit secrecy . This intent is very seldom the only, or the principal, intention entertained by the fraudulent person, whose principal object nearly every case is his own advantage . A practically conclusive test of the fraudulent character of a deception for criminal purposes is this: did the author of the deceit derive any advantage from which could not have been had if the truth had been known? If so it is hardly possible that the advantage should not have had an equivalent in loss or risk of loss to s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dvancing of large sums of money exceeding the limits allowed by law at the time. The court held that the said intention amounted to intend to defraud. Hilbery, J., speaking for the court, pointed out the distinction between deceit and defraud and came to the conclusion that to defraud is to deprive by deceit . Adverting to the argument that the deprivation must be something of value, i.e, economic loss the learned Judge observed: We have, however, come to the conclusion that this is too narrow a view. While, no doubt, in most cases of an intention to defraud the intention is to cause an economic loss, there is no reason to introduce any such limitation. Provided that the intention is to cause the person deceived to act to his real detriment, it matters not that he suffers no economic loss. It is sufficient if the intention is to deprive him of a right or to induce him to do something contrary to what it would have been his duty to do, had he not been deceived. On the basis of the said principle, it was held that the accused by deceit induced the finance companies to advance moneys contrary to the credit restrictions and that he was guilty of the offence of forgery. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... found in that case that both the elements were present. Benson, J. pointed out at p. 114: I am of opinion that the act was fraudulent not merely by reason of the advantage which the accused intended to secure for himself by means of his deceit, but also by reason of the injury which must necessarily result to the University, and through it to the public from such acts if unrepressed. The University is injured, if through the evasion of its bye- laws, it is induced to declare that certain persons have fulfilled the conditions prescribed for Matriculation and are entitled to the benefits of Matriculation, when in fact, they have not fulfilled those conditions for the value of its examinations is depreciated in the eyes of the public if it is found that the certificate of the University that they have passed its examinations is no longer a guarantee that they have in truth fulfilled the conditions on winch alone the University professes to certify them as passed, and to admit them to the benefits of Matriculation. Boddam, J., agreed with the learned Chief Justice and Benson, J. This decision accepts the principle laid down by Stephen, namely, that the intention to defr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ar appearing in person, ably assisted by learned counsel Mr. Sameer Dawar and learned counsel Mr. Rohit Kathuria appearing together for and on behalf of the respondent nos. 3, 35 to 37 and 40 to 45, as the same are against the settled position of law. It is further clarified that with respect to the proposition of law laid down by a Co- ordinate Bench of this Court in S.P. Gupta (supra), the reliance thereon is misplaced, as the same was rendered on 24.03.2005, i.e., prior to coming into force of the 2013 Act wherein the SFIO was specifically brought in, in view of the changes happening from time to time, as elaborated hereinabove. Further, the reliance placed upon Section 26 of the General Clauses Act, is of no assistance, as the same cannot come to the aid of the aforesaid respondents, in view of what has been discussed and entailed hereinabove. Moreover, though various judgements were handed over by the aforesaid respondents during the course of arguments, but, since no reliance was placed on them, the same, are not being considered by this Court. Even otherwise, in the opinion of this Court, they have no applicability to the facts of the present case. The rest of the judgments ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ternal interference in investigation and the specific facts of this case, we are of the view that the High Court ought to have exercised its jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC to secure the ends of justice. There is no prohibition under law for quashing a charge-sheet in part. A person may be accused of several offences under different penal statutes, as in the instant case. He could be aggrieved of prosecution only on a particular charge or charges, on any ground available to him in law. Under Section 482, all that the High Court is required to examine is whether its intervention is required for implementing orders under the Criminal Procedure Code or for prevention of abuse of process, or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. A charge-sheet filed at the dictate of somebody other than the police would amount to abuse of the process of law and hence the High Court ought to have exercised its inherent powers under Section 482 to the extent of the abuse. There is no requirement that the charge-sheet has to be quashed as a whole and not in part. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed. The supplementary report filed by the police, at the direction of the Commission, is quashed. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ies ordered by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs vide order dated 14.10.2021 under Section 212 of the Companies Act, 2013. 94. Accordingly, in view of the above the petition stands disposed of alongwith pending applications, if any. 95. Copy of this order be sent to SFIO HQ, New Delhi and S.H.O., EOW, New Delhi. ------------------------ Notes: 1. Section 235. INVESTIGATION OF THE AFFAIRS OF A COMPANY. (1) The Central Government may, where a report has been made by the Registrar under sub- section (6) of section 234, or under sub-section (7) of that section, read with sub-section (6) thereof, appoint one or more competent persons as inspectors to investigate the affairs of a company and to report thereon in such manner as the Central Government may direct. (2) Where- (a) in the case of a company having a share capital, an application has been received from not less than two hundred members or from members holding not less than one-tenth of the total voting power therein, and (b) in case of a company having no share capital, an application has been received from not less than one-fifth of the persons on the company's register ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... company, or a holding company of its subsidiary ; or (b) 1[(b) any other body corporate which is, or has at any relevant time been, managed by any person as managing director or as manager, who is, or was, at the relevant time, the managing director or the manager of the company ; or] (c) any other body corporate, which is, or has at any relevant time been, managed by the company or whose Board of directors comprises of nominees of the company or is accustomed to act in accordance with the directions or instructions of (i) the company, or (ii) any of the directors of the company, or (iii) any company, any of whose directorships is held by the employees or nominees of those having the control and management of the first- mentioned company ; or (d) any person who is or has at any relevant time been the company's managing director or manager,]. 1[the inspector shall, subject to the provisions of sub-section (2), have power so to do and shall report on the affairs of the other body corporate or of the managing director or manager, so far as he thinks that the results of his investigation thereof are relevant to the investigation of the affairs of the first ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (4) [Omitted by the Companies (Amendment) Act, 2000, with effect from 13-12-2000.] (5) For the purposes of any investigation under this section, sections 239, 240 and 241 shall apply with the necessary modifications of references to the affairs of the company or to those of any other body corporate 3 [***] : Provided that the said sections shall apply in relation to all persons (including persons concerned only on behalf of others) who are or have been, or whom the inspector has reasonable cause to believe to be or to have been, - (i) financially interested in the success or failure, or the apparent success or failure, of the company, or of any other body corporate 4 [***] whose membership or constitution is investigated with that of the company ; or (ii) able to control or materially to influence the policy of such company, body corporate 2 [***] ; as they apply in relation to officers and other employees and agents of the company, of the other body corporate 5 [***], as the case may be : Provided further that the Central Government shall not be bound to furnish the company or any other person with a copy of any report by an inspector appointed under this section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Central Government in terms of the Government of India Resolution No. 45011/16/2003- Adm-I, dated the 2nd July, 2003 shall be deemed to be the Serious Fraud Investigation Office for the purpose of this section. (2) The Serious Fraud Investigation Office shall be headed by a Director and consist of such number of experts from the following fields to be appointed by the Central Government from amongst persons of ability, integrity and experience in, - (i) banking; (ii) corporate affairs; (iii) taxation; (iv) forensic audit; (v) capital market; (vi) information technology; (vii) law; or (viii) such other fields as may be prescribed. (3) The Central Government shall, by notification, appoint a Director in the Serious Fraud Investigation Office, who shall be an officer not below the rank of a Joint Secretary to the Government of India having knowledge and experience in dealing with matters relating to corporate affairs. (4) The Central Government may appoint such experts and other officers and employees in the Serious Fraud Investigation Office as it considers necessary for the efficient discharge of its functions under this Act. (5) The terms an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ay require for conduct of the investigation. (6) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), 1 [offence covered under section 447] of this Act shall be cognizable and no person accused of any offence under those sections shall be released on bail or on his own bond unless (i) the Public Prosecutor has been given an opportunity to oppose the application for such release; and (ii) where the Public Prosecutor opposes the application, the court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that he is not guilty of such offence and that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail: Provided that a person, who, is under the age of sixteen years or is a woman or is sick or infirm, may be released on bail, if the Special Court so directs: Provided further that the Special Court shall not take cognizance of any offence referred to this subsection except upon a complaint in writing made by (i) the Director, Serious Fraud Investigation Office; or (ii) any officer of the Central Government authorised, by a general or special order in writing in this behalf by that Government. (7) The limitation on gra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pany or any other person directly or indirectly connected with the affairs of the company. (15) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act or in any other law for the time being in force, the investigation report filed with the Special Court for framing of charges shall be deemed to be a report filed by a police officer under section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974). (16) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, any investigation or other action taken or initiated by Serious Fraud Investigation Office under the provisions of the 2013 Act, 1956 (1 of 1956) shall continue to be proceeded with under that Act as if this Act had not been passed. (17) (a) In case Serious Fraud Investigation Office has been investigating any offence under this Act, any other investigating agency, State Government, police authority, income-tax authorities having any information or documents in respect of such offence shall provide all such information or documents available with it to the Serious Fraud Investigation Office; (b) The Serious Fraud Investigation Office shall share any information or documents available with it, with any investigating agency, State ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
