P.C. Brief facts of the case are as follows appellant No.1 HDFC Securities Ltd., is a public liability companypany hereinafter referred to as the Company for short , appellant No.2 is the Managing Director of the Company, appellant No.3 is Business Head of the Company, and appellant No.4 is the Regional head of Mumbai Region of the Company, respectively.
Specific allegations were levelled against RM and appellant No.3 as she was introduced to RM by appellant No.3 and was told that RM would handle her investment portfolio honestly and efficiently with her prior instructions.
with regard to the transactions undertaken by the appellants on her behalf, which were required to be issued by the trading member to the investor immediately after the trade is undertaken.
Thereafter, she filed arbitration proceedings before NSE Panel of Arbitrators against the Company for a sum of Rs.48.99 Lacs and companyts of Rs.2.5 Lacs, and chose the Arbitrators of her choice, being two retired High Court Judges and sought to call RM as a witness.
P.C. before 10th Metropolitan Magistrate, Andheri, bearing Case No.143/2010, alleging execution of unauthorized trades in her account without her companysent by the appellants and claimed that she had thereby suffered losses amounting to Rs.70 Lacs.
In the meantime, as the Police did number take companynizance of the matter, albeit she filed a companyplaint on 31st march, 2010, against the appellants, RM and AVP, on 10th June, 2010, she also filed a criminal companyplaint under Section 156 3 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 hereinafter referred to as Cr.
On 25th September, 2010, she preferred an appeal before NSE Appellate Panel of Arbitrators, being Arbitration REF No.
The Appellate tribunal found that respondent No.2 had number denied the fact of having received all the necessary documents, including Contract numberes, etc.
Meanwhile, the Appellate Tribunal had decided the appeal against respondent No.2, vide its Award dated 24th January, 2011.
This Notice was also sent to RM and one Rohan Raut, Assistant Vice President of the Company, on 20th October, 2009.
The High Court by its judgment dated 16.11.2011, dismissed both the writ petitions as according to it, the filing of the writ petitions was premature and there was numberneed for exercising the powers either under Article 227 of the Constitution of India or under Section 482 Cr.
CM M 213/2009, wherein she disputed the trades which had taken place during the period December 2008 to April 2009.
Pursuant to the order of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate dated 4.01.2011, Juhu Police Station registered the FIR, being MECR No.7 of 2011 dated 30th January, 2011, under Sections 409, 420, 465, 467 read with Sections 34 and 120 B of the IPC.
Thereafter, the appellants filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court, being Criminal Writ Petition No.672 of 2011, inter alia praying for quashing of the said FIR and the same prayer was also made in Criminal Writ Petition No.767 of 2011, filed by RM before the High Court.
The Arbitrators passed an award in favour of the Company on 18th August, 2010, recording a shift in the stand of respondent No.2, authorizing her husband to trade on her behalf.
On 3rd August, 2009, respondent No.2, through a legal Notice dated 03.08.2009, requested the appellants to make good the losses caused to her by indulging in unauthorized and fraudulent trading in her account by one Vinod Koper Relationship Manager of the companypany RM in short during the period July, 2008 to June, 2009.
She executed a Member Client Agreement dated 28th June, 2005.
The Company is engaged in the business of dealing in shares and securities on behalf of its companystituents and clients on Brokerage Charge and it is also a member of National Stock Exchange of India Limited NSE and Bombay Stock Exchange of India Limited BSE .
Respondent No.2, had registered herself with the Company as a companystituent client by opening Securities Trading Account vide No.342889 and was an imperial customer of the Company for about eight years.
P.C. Aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment of the High Court, the appellants have approached this Court by filing this appeal by special leave.
Pinaki Chandra Ghose, J. Leave granted.
Being companypletely oblivious of the Arbitration proceedings, the award passed therein and the appeal preferred by respondent No.2, on 04.01.2011, the learned Metropolitan Magistrate directed registration of FIR against the appellants and ordered for a report after investigation.
This appeal has been filed assailing the judgment and order dated 16th November, 2011, passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Criminal Writ Petition No.672 of 2011, whereby the writ petitions filed by the appellants were dismissed by the High Court on the ground that the filing of the writ petition was premature and there was numberneed for exercising the powers either under Article 227 of the Constitution of India or under Section 482 Cr.
Respondent No.1 is State of Maharashtra and respondent No.2 is an individual, who held an account with the Company.
General allegations of involvement of other appellants were made.
