MITHU MAZUMDER and 32 ORS V. THE UNION OF INDIA and 5 ORS

WP(C)/6635/2014

AI Insights

The case involves a group of petitioners who were agents of M/s Orchid Infra Projects and Services Limited, a company accused of conducting business without valid permissions from the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) and the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI). The petitioners, along with the managing director and another director of the company, were involved in collecting deposits from the public. Following the government's decision to halt unregistered collective investment schemes, the company began winding up its operations. The petitioners sought judicial intervention to expedite the investigation and prevent the tampering of evidence by the company's directors, who were out on bail. The court noted that the criminal trials were already in progress, and thus, the writ petition was considered unnecessary.

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 684509 (HC-ASSAM NAGALAND MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 17-08-2018
• Assessment Year: misc
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: A DAS; P CHAKRABORTY; M BHATTACHARRRYA
• Assessee Lawyers: B P BORAH
• Keywords: Cheating; Collective Investment Scheme; Fraud; Seizure of property; Winding up

Judgement Text

"Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010187972014 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C) 6635/2014 1:MITHU MAZUMDER and 32 ORS S/O RABINDRA MAZUMDER, R/O RONGMIRDAN, P.O. and P.S. DIPHU, PIN- 782460, DIST- KARBI ANGLONG, ASSAM VERSUS 1:THE UNION OF INDIA and 5 ORS REP. BY COMMISSIONER AND SECY. HOME DEPTT. AND INCOME TAX DEPTT., NEW DELHI 2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY HOME DEPARTMENT STATE OF ASSAM. 3:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE ASSAM. 4:THE RESERVE BANK OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY DIRECTOR NEW DELHI. 5:THE CHAIRMAN SECURITY AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA SEBI. 6:MANAGING DIRECTOR DEEPAK CHAKRABORTY S/O DILIP CHAKRABORTY R/O JARANG DISHA LUMDING NAGAON ASSAM AND SIX BOARD OF DIRECTORS. 7:RAJESH KANTI PAUL S/O LATE B.R.PAUL R/O BITHAN PALLY Page No.# 2/3 LUMDING NAGAON ASSAM. 8:THE OFFICER IN CHARGE GOLAGHAT POLICE STATION GOLAGHAT ASSAM. 9:THE OFFICER IN CHARGE DIPHU POLICE STATION DIPHU ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.B P BORAH Advocate for the Respondent : MS.A DASR-6and7 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRASANTA KUMAR DEKA ORDER Date : 17-08-2018 Heard Mr.B.P.Bora, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Also heard Ms.P.Chakraborty, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos.6 and 7 and Ms.M.Bhattacharrrya, learned Additional Senior Govt. Advocate appearing for the respondent Nos.2,3,8 and 9. The petitioners are aggrieved by the action of M/s Orchid Infra Projects and Services Limited. The petitioners are the agents of said Company and the respondent No. 6 is the Managing Director of the said Company. The petitioners were motivated by the said respondent Nos.6 and 7 and were doing business by collecting deposit from the various people in the district of Karbi Along for and on behalf of the said Company. It is alleged that the said Company was carrying on business without any valid permission from R.B.I and S.E.B.I. The Company officials started winding up process, keeping in view the decision of Govt. of Assam to stop collective investment scheme without valid permission and liquidating the liabilities towards the investors through the petitioners in the said Company fund. Having Page No.# 3/3 come to know about such winding process the agents pressed the respondent Nos. 6 and 7 to honour the liabilities of the said Company towards the investors which the respondent Nos. 6 and 7 denied. Various cases were lodged alleging fraud and cheating against the Company and its officials by the investors at Golaghat Police Station in Golaghat P.S. Case No.266/2013 and Dimapur and Diphu P.S.Case Nos. 92/2013, 57/2013 and 158/2013. Apprehending that respondent Nos. 6 and 7 who were granted bail in the aforesaid police cases might temper the evidence by influencing the witnesses, this writ petition is filed for direction to complete the investigation at the earliest and for seizure of various plot of land which the Company purchased, as mentioned in the prayer portion. Ms.Chakraborty submits that after the police cases mentioned hereinabove, charge sheet/charge sheets were filed by the concerned Police stations after investigation and as on date trial is also going on at Golaghat and the same is on the verge of completion as the evidence is almost completed. Keeping in view the development, in my opinion, there is no further necessity in keeping pending this writ petition as the trial already started and the law will take its own course. Regarding the other prayer of seizure of immovable property standing in the name of the company, necessary steps may be taken in the Criminal Court itself as per law by the petitioners. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant "