Seniority Must Be Calculated From the Date of Initial Appointment, Not Regularization: Madras High Court Rules Section 319 Cr.P.C. | Mere Association Not Enough for Criminal Liability: Karnataka HC Himachal Pradesh High Court Upholds ₹25,000 Per Kanal Compensation for Land Acquired for Nangal-Talwara Railway Line, Dismisses Railway’s Appeal No Work No Pay Principle Not Applicable: Orissa High Court Orders Reinstatement and Full Back Wages for Wrongfully Terminated Lecturer No Assault, No Obstruction, Only Words Exchanged: Bombay High Court Quashes Charges of Obstruction Against Advocates Under Section 353 IPC Matrimonial Offences Can Be Quashed Even if Non-Compoundable, When Genuine Compromise Is Reached: J&K HC Plaintiff Entitled to Partition, But Must Contribute Redemption Share to Defendant: Delhi High Court Clarifies Subrogation Rights in Mortgage Redemption Labeling Someone A 'Rowdy' Without Convictions Infringes Personal Liberty And Reputation: Kerala High Court P&H High Court Denies Pensionary Benefits for Work-Charged Employee's Widow; Declares Work-Charged Service Not Eligible for ACP or Pension Benefits Acquittal is Acquittal: Rajasthan High Court Orders Appointment of Candidate Denied Job Over Past FIR At The Bail Stage, Culpability Is Not To Be Decided; Allegations Must Be Tested During Trial: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in SCST Supreme Court Dismisses Challenge to "Secular" and "Socialist" Additions in Constitution Preamble Supreme Court Rejects Res Judicata in Land Allotment Case: Fresh Cause of Action Validates Public Interest Litigation Public Resources Are Not Privileges for the Few: Supreme Court Declares Preferential Land Allotments to Elites Unconstitutional Past antecedents alone cannot justify denial of bail: Kerala High Court Grants Bail Revenue Records Alone Cannot Prove Ownership: Madras High Court Dismisses Temple's Appeal for Injunction Humanitarian Grounds Cannot Undermine Investigation: Himachal Pradesh High Court Grants Interim Bail in ₹200 Crore Scholarship Scam The Power Under Order XXXVIII, Rule 5 CPC is Drastic and Extraordinary; Should Not Be Exercised Mechanically or Merely for the Asking: Calcutta High Court Telangana High Court Strikes Down Section 10-A: Upholds Transparency in Public Employment Absence of Homogeneous Mixing and Procedural Deficiencies Vitiate NDPS Conviction: Punjab and Haryana High Court Business Disputes Cannot Be Given Criminal Color: Patna High Court Quashes Complaint in Trademark Agreement Case Gujarat High Court Appoints Wife as Guardian of Comatose Husband, Calls for Legislative Framework Standard of Proof in Professional Misconduct Requires 'Higher Threshold' but Below 'Beyond Reasonable Doubt: Delhi High Court Imprisonment Cannot Bar Education: Bombay HC Allows UAPA Accused to Pursue LL.B. High Court Acquits Accused in Double Murder Case, Asserts ‘Suspicion Cannot Replace Proof’ Long separation and irreparable breakdown of marriage must be read as cruelty under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act: Andhra Pradesh High Court Regulation 101 Applies to All Aided Institutions, Including Minority Ones, Says Allahabad High Court Fraud Unravels All Judicial Acts : Jharkhand High Court Orders Demolition of Unauthorized Constructions in Ratan Heights Case Suspicious Circumstances Cannot Validate a Will: Himachal Pradesh High Court Upholds 1997 Will Over 2000 Will

"Criminal Conspiracy Cannot Be Cloaked as Civil Dispute," Says Delhi High Court in VLS Finance Case

06 September 2024 12:13 PM

By: sayum


The Delhi High Court has dismissed multiple petitions seeking to quash an FIR filed against the directors of VLS Finance Ltd., rejecting the argument that the dispute was purely civil in nature. The judgment, delivered by Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, underscores the need for a comprehensive investigation given the serious allegations of criminal conspiracy, cheating, and breach of trust.

The case revolves around a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) signed on March 11, 1995, between Sunair Hotels Ltd. and VLS Finance Ltd., a Non-Banking Finance Company (NBFC). According to the complainant, Sunair Hotels, the directors of VLS Finance misrepresented their financial stability and intentions, inducing the complainant to part with 70 lakh shares at a significantly undervalued price. It is alleged that VLS Finance did not fulfill its financial commitments under the MoU, including the provision of a Rs. 10 crore security deposit and arranging Rs. 85 crores in loans, thereby jeopardizing Sunair’s hotel project in New Delhi.

The court found no merit in the petitioners’ claim that the order directing the registration of the FIR was passed without application of mind. Justice Sharma noted that the Magistrate had considered the allegations and found that a cognizable offense was prima facie made out, justifying the registration of the FIR under Section 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.).

Rejecting the petitioners' contention that the matter was purely civil, the court highlighted the nature of the allegations, which included criminal conspiracy, cheating, and breach of trust. The court observed that these allegations required a thorough investigation, which could not be prematurely dismissed as a civil dispute.

The judgment emphasized the principles set by the Supreme Court in cases like Neeharika Infrastructure v. State of Maharashtra and State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, which mandate that FIRs should only be quashed in the rarest of rare cases. The court noted that the allegations, if proven, would constitute serious offenses, and thus, the investigation must proceed.

Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma remarked, "In cases involving complex financial transactions and allegations of criminal breach of trust, it is imperative that the investigative agencies are allowed to collect evidence and ascertain the truth."

The dismissal of the petitions reaffirms the judiciary’s stance on ensuring thorough investigations in cases involving serious allegations of financial fraud and conspiracy. The decision paves the way for the continuation of the criminal proceedings against the accused, with the court leaving it open for them to challenge the findings at the stage of framing charges.

Date of Decision: September 3, 2024

Rajinder Kumar Puri & Ors. vs. State & Anr.

Similar News