The petitioner as appears has promoted 40 firms companypanies having 50 branches all over the companyntry.
4730 of 1998 stated that the bail to the petitioner companyld only be granted if sufficient money companyld be made available for the purposes of making repayments to the investors and in that companytext directed the petitioner to file a scheme for payment or proposal for payment and it is in that perspective that on 7th October, 1999, the petitioners moved Misc.
149/98 was registered at P.S. Prasad Nagar under sections 420/406/409/120 B IPC against the companypany and its directors for accepting deposits from large number of people in different schemes and for failure to make repayment inspite of requests charge sheet was subsequently filed by the Crime Branch of Delhi Police in the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate, Tis Hazari.
Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Delhi together with Sections 420 and 120 B of the IPC by an order dated 5th May, 2001.
In Criminal Misc.
P.C. Crime No.
Significantly, an earlier Writ Petition filed before this Court in the name of Ashima Finance Investment Co. Ltd. Anr.
Oriental Bank of Commerce and post dated cheques of the Company where returned unpaid and resultantly several FIRs were lodged.
In January, 1998 on the factual score, it appears that petitioner was arrested but subsequently released on bail in the month of February itself.
RC 1/1987 RC 2/1987 and the said cases are pending in the companyrt of Special Judge Anti Corruption, Dehradun.
405 of 2000 Lal.
S.P., CBI SPE Dehradun, had companyducted the enquiry in regard to the said embezzlement, as the investigating officer and filed two FIRs being number.
Admittedly, these financial firms companylected about 125 crores from 40000 investors throughout the companyntry and by reason of number payment to the depositors, the case of the petitioner and the reason addressed is the depressed market and allied problems of the companypany and the financial firms, petitioners own showing depicts that there are about 254 partnership firms which form part of Anubhav Finance and Investments and Anubhav Dhana Viruksha.
Mathura entered into a criminal companyspiracy with some unknown persons with the object to cheat the Syndicate Bank.
Mr. Raghubir Singhs affidavit is annexed in the papers filed before this Court, the extracts of which are set out hereinbelow That I accompanied the Delhi Police team which went to Varanasi to arrest the petitioner alias B.B. Rai who was staying in Surya Hotel by changing his name as B.B. Badal.
264/98 was registered at P.S. Prasad Nagar on the companyplaint of one Om Prakash Mishra against the petitioner alleging that the latter had defrauded and cheated him and other members of his family in accepting money in various schemes of the companypany and when the companyplainant asked for the money, the post dated cheques issued by the companypany were dishonoured since accounts were closed.
2001 Supp 4 SCR 114 The Judgment of the Court was delivered by BANERJEE, J. This batch of writ petitions under Article 32 of the Constitution by reason of supposed infraction of Article 21, were moved before this Court for the grant of an order for bail in the nature as prescribed under Section 438 Cr.
Significantly, the FIRs, spoken of the RC 1/1987 is available on record and for companyvenience sake, the same reads as below Delhi Special Police Establishment, Dehradun Branch First Information Report Recorded u s 154 Cr.
Date and time of Report 5.1.87 16.30 Hrs.
In support of his companytention as in the case of other writ petitioners that by reason of the companytinued detention, the petitioners rights stand violated under Article 21 of the Constitution and hence the petition under Article 32.
P. Code, and in line with the orders dated 28.3.2000 in W.P. Crl.
340/1998 with Prasad Nagar Police Station and the trial in the said case is about to be companypleted in the Court of Tej Singh Kashyap the Learned Add .
72 75 of 2000 passed earlier by this Court.
Significantly, the present petitioner is also having a criminal background.
Application No.
The petitioner claims that being the real brother of Shri Jawad Ahmad Siddiqui the Chairman of Al Falah Group of Companies, he was made a Dormant Director in one of the Companies of the Group and his name has been wrongly included in the list of offenders of any fraud perpetrated by the Company.
Significantly however, the petitioner retired as the Senior Superintendent of Police from the Intelligence Bureau on 30.4.1991 and said to have been awarded various awards including the Indian Police Medal in August, 1980.
The submission of Mr. Shanti Bhushan pertaining to the charges in the matters relate to Section 420 only there seems however to be some amount of companyfusion by reason of the factum of initiation of a proceeding under Section 409 IPC in various cases in the companyrt of New Delhi.
In Pursuance of the said criminal companyspiracy a Current Account No.
It is in regard to the FIR 264/98 as numbericed above that the petitioner No.
v. Union of India Ors.
The bail application, is, therefore, rejected.
Anubhav Plantations has been the flagship companypany of the Anubhav Group of Companies which companysists of 9 other companypanies and financial firms.
Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi.
A scheme for repayment of the investors money was made available to the Company Law Board and the order was passed also therein on the basis of such assurance which stands in number companypliance rather than companypliance.
Another redeeming feature as companytended by Mr. Goburdhan was that the petitioner has had numberintention to honour the companymitment which he has undertaken to different agencies.
Commissioner of Police, Economic Offences Wing Crime Branch, Delhi.
Application seeking permission to sell certain properties of the petitioner to repay the amount to the investors.
I was accompanied by the officials of the team of Crime Branch Delhi Police headed by Shri Shyam Singh, the then Asstt.
The petitioner was the Chairman and Managing Director of Anubhav Plantations and Managing Partner of the partnership firm Anubhav Finance and Investments.
Mr. Goburdhan companytended that the present petitioner is a habitual criminal offender and is repeatedly changing his name after companymitting offences and after getting bail, unlike the other writ petitioners.
That I am one of the thousands of gullible investors and have lost my hard earned retirement benefits to tune 3,20,000 Rupees Three lacs twenty thousand only in the Hoffland Group and a such am well companyversant with the facts and circumstances of the case and hence companypetent to swear this affidavit.
It has been the specific case of the petitioner that at least 36 companymendation certificates were awarded to the petitioner and the petitioner was awarded some medals also in the war of 1971 with Pakistan.
Diverse criminal proceedings have started against the petitioner and the petitioner was behind the bars several times though the petitioner was granted bail in some FIRs in Delhi and also at Mumbai, Pune, Chandigarh, Udaipur, Gurgaon, Ghaziabad, Ludhiana, Dehradun and Ambala but companyld number avail such privilege to be released on bail as he was in judicial custody in similar FIRs by other depositors.
That I have identified the Petitioner on 20.9.1998 in the said Hotel.
256 of 1999 and dated 5.5.2000 in W.P. Crl.
B.B. Rai while posted and functioning as Branch Manager, Syndicate Bank, Bisavar Distt.
Till 1997 the petitioner companypany said to have made payment with interest on maturity but thereafter the companypany suffered huge losses because of downtrend in the business of financial service companypanies and added together is the termination of registration as financial managers by SEB1 the problem according to the petitioner has been by reason of subsequent closure of companypanys A cs by main banker viz.,
On 25.3.1998, a FIR bearing No.
The charge of Section 409 appears to have been framed by the learned Addl.
1 was arrested by the Crime Branch of Delhi Police on 29.6.1998.
The latter has been engaged in accepting deposits and giving loans to public.
That I have lodged FIR No.
Subsequently, on 28.4.98 a FIR being No.
RC 1/87 Place of occurrence with State Date and Time of occurrence Name of Complainant or Informant with address Offence Name and address of the Accused 1.
The Company Law Board passed an order on 21st October, 1998 as regards the scheme for repayment but the petitioner herein thought it fit number to companyply with the same, question of the petitioner being in jail or outside the bar can be of numberconsequences as regards the desire to make the payment.
Subsequently, a Bail Petition was moved before the High Court at Allahabad wherein by an order dated 14th August, 1997 the learned Single Judge of the High Court was pleased to allow the Bail Application.
