Order XLI Rule 23A CPC | Re-Trial Necessary When Crucial Parties Impleaded In Appeal: Telangana High Court Cannot Freeze Entire Bank Account For Small Disputed Sums: Rajasthan High Court Issues Comprehensive Guidelines Against Indiscriminate Account Freezes In Cyber Crime Probes 187(3) BNSS | No Extension Of Investigation Time Without Notice To Accused: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Default Bail In NDPS Case Road Widening Under Master Plan Cannot Be Stalled For Formal Land Acquisition, Section 305 Permits Direct Removal Of Encroachments: Madhya Pradesh High Court P&H High Court Quashes Preventive Detention Over 45-Day Delay In Informing Detenu Of Right To Represent 'Sole Allegation Of Torture Cannot Stand Alone': Andhra Pradesh High Court Acquits Husband Under Section 498A IPC After Dowry Demand Disproved Seeking Corroboration To Victim's Testimony Amounts To Adding Insult To Injury: Bombay High Court Upholds Rape Conviction Offences Of Cheating & Criminal Breach Of Trust Cannot Coexist On Same Facts: Calcutta High Court Quashes FIR Over Commercial Contract Dispute "Accident Alone Is Not Proof": Delhi High Court Acquits Bus Driver In 2003 Road Fatality Case, Rules Mere Speeding Or Collision Insufficient For Section 304A IPC Mandate Of Regulations Must Be Read Into Public Notices: Kerala High Court Reverses Order Directing NMC To Reopen Portal For Medical College's PG Seat Hike Unproven 1946 Oral Sale And Subsequent School Gift Cannot Convey Valid Title Over Tribal Land: Orissa High Court Orders Compensation After 80 Years ED Can Probe Money Laundering In J&K Corruption Cases: J&K High Court Rules S. 5(1)(d) J&K PC Act Corresponds To Amended S. 7 Of Central PC Act Not Mere Lip Service: Supreme Court Quashes GST Notice Under Section 74 Lacking Foundational Facts Of Fraud Or Suppression Selling Manufactured Goods At Factory Premises Doesn't Turn 'Industrial' Land Into 'Commercial' For Stamp Duty: Supreme Court Supreme Court Orders All States To Form Dedicated SITs To Probe Fake Motor Accident Claims, Warns Insurance Top Brass Against Selective Referrals Port Trusts Not Immune From Customs Duty On Pilfered Goods: Supreme Court Upholds Notification Declaring Mumbai Port Trust As Custodian Under Section 45

High Court Dismisses Plea Alleging Financial Irregularities by Indiabulls; Says No Substantial Evidence Found

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment, the Delhi High Court has dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking an in-depth investigation into the alleged financial irregularities and fund siphoning by Indiabulls Housing Finance Limited (IBHFL) and its group companies. The bench, comprising Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Neena Bansal Krishna, held that there was no substantial evidence to support the allegations.

The petitioner, Citizens Whistle Blower Forum, represented by advocates including Mr. Prashant Bhushan, had sought the court's intervention for a Special Investigation Team (SIT) probe into the alleged financial misconduct by Indiabulls. They contended that the company and its subsidiaries were involved in dubious loans and investments, violating several statutory provisions.

However, the bench observed, "Due to articles published in magazines and newspapers, the shareholders of the accused companies were jolted and they were made to suffer huge losses." The court further noted that "the jurisdiction of investigation lies within the realm of the investigating agency and a court has no authority to interfere in the investigation until and unless there is grave miscarriage of justice or misuse of process of law."

In its detailed judgment, the court referred to the counter affidavits and inspection reports from various regulatory bodies, including the Ministry of Corporate Affairs, Reserve Bank of India (RBI), and the National Housing Bank (NHB). These reports indicated that most loans in question had been repaid and those remaining were considered standard accounts.

The court also highlighted the lack of evidence substantiating the petitioner's claims and observed that the ongoing investigations by regulatory authorities were sufficient. "The power to transfer an investigation must be used 'sparingly' and only 'in exceptional circumstances'," the court remarked, citing the Supreme Court's directives in similar cases.

Date of Decision: February 2, 2024

CITIZENS WHISTLE BLOWER FORUM VS UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

 

Latest Legal News