Supreme Court Lays Down Comprehensive Guidelines To Prevent Misuse Of POCSO Act In Matrimonial Disputes Land Reforms Act | Joint Application For Pre-Emption By Adjoining Landowners Is Maintainable: Calcutta High Court Ocular Evidence In Conflict With Medical Findings Or Withholding Of Natural Witnesses Vitiates Prosecution Case: Allahabad High Court Compassionate Appointment Claim Must Be Decided Based On Policy Prevalent At Time Of Death: Bombay High Court Section 376 IPC | Failure To Prove Initial Dishonest Intent In Marriage Promise Renders Sexual Relationship Consensual: Allahabad High Court Prolonged Incarceration And Delay In Trial Are Valid Grounds To Invoke Constitutional Right To Speedy Trial Under Article 21 In UAPA Cases: Delhi High Court Motor Vehicles Act | Insurer Liable To Pay And Recover Compensation For Gratuitous Passengers In Goods Vehicles: Gujarat High Court Proof Of Demand And Acceptance Under PC Act Must Be Evaluated Based On Preponderance Of Probabilities In Rebuttal: Kerala High Court Tenancy Claim | Mere Possession Without Lawful Foundation Or Identification Of Tenanted Land Cannot Confer Occupancy Rights: Karnataka High Court 125 CrPC | Maintenance Cannot Be Evaded By Claiming Physical Disability If Conduct Indicates Concealment Of Financial Means: Kerala High Court M.P. Municipal Corporation Act | Locus Standi Under Section 307(5) Limited To Residents Of The Municipal Area: Madhya Pradesh High Court Writ Jurisdiction | Belated Challenge To Disciplinary Action After Superannuation Amounts To Laches; Petition Dismissed: Punjab & Haryana High Court Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 CPC | Mere Pendency Of Partition Suit Does Not Entitle Plaintiff To Injunction Restraining Reconstruction Of Residential Building: Kerala High Court Not A Mere Breach Of Contract: Telangana High Court Refuses To Quash FIR In ₹73 Crore Garment Investment Fraud Section 482 CrPC | High Court Quashes FIR Following Private Compromise In Non-Heinous Dispute Arising From Civil Conflict Mere Involvement In Criminal Case Does Not Constitute Moral Turpitude To Deny Public Appointment: Telangana High Court Pendency Of Investigation Cannot Be A Blanket Ground To Deny Permission For Foreign Travel: Rajasthan High Court Fraudulent Representation By Counsel Vitiates Ex Parte Decree: Punjab & Haryana High Court Holds Professional Misconduct As Evidence Of Fraud Writ Jurisdiction | Suppression Of Material Facts Regarding Pending Criminal And Departmental Proceedings Renders Petition Liable To Dismissal: Orissa High Court Banking Fraud | Failure Of Bank Official To Conduct Physical Inspection Of Collateral Property Constitutes Criminal Conspiracy And Abuse Of Official Position: Madras High Court Fraud Vitiates Judicial Proceedings: Judgment Obtained Through Misrepresentation And Conflict Of Interest Cannot Be Sustained, Holds Punjab And Haryana High Court Discovery Under Section 27 Evidence Act From Publicly Accessible Place Requires Caution: Supreme Court Mere Recovery Of Articles At Instance Of Accused Without Independent Corroboration Cannot Sustain Conviction: Supreme Court DNA Profile Must Be Supported By Other Conclusive Evidence To Prove Guilt: Supreme Court

Supreme Court directs Union of India to transfer Rs. 5,000 Crores to Sahara Group depositors

03 September 2024 9:41 AM

By: Admin


On 29 March 2023 , In a recent judgement Pinak Pani Mohanty Vs. Union of India and Ors. And In the matter of Union of India through Ministry of Cooperation  , the Supreme Court of India has directed the Union of India, Ministry of Corporation to transfer an amount of Rs. 5,000 Crores out of the unutilized amount of Rs. 23,937 Crores lying in the "Sahara-SEBI Refund Account" to be disbursed against the legitimate dues of depositors of Sahara Group of Cooperative Societies.

The judgement came in response to the present application I.A. No. 56308 of 2023 preferred by the Union of India. The Solicitor General has submitted that the amount deposited in the "Sahara-SEBI Refund Account" is lying unutilized and the amount belongs to the depositors of the Sahara Group of Cooperative Society Ltd.

The Supreme Court has also directed that the disbursement of the amount shall be supervised and monitored by Justice R. Subhash Reddy, Former Judge of this Court with the able assistance of Shri Gaurav Agarwal, learned Advocate, who is appointed as Amicus Curiae to assist Justice R. Subhash Reddy as well as the Central Registrar of Cooperative Societies in disbursing the amount to the genuine depositors of the Sahara Group of Cooperative Societies. The disbursement shall be made in the most transparent manner and on proper identification and on submitting proof of their deposits and claims, and to be deposited in their respective bank accounts directly. The balance amount after disbursal shall be transferred back to the "Sahara-SEBI Refund Account".

The Supreme Court has also directed that Rs. 15 lakhs per month be paid to Justice R. Subhash Reddy, Former Judge of this Court and Rs. 5 lakhs per month be paid to Shri Gaurav Agarwal, learned Amicus Curiae towards their honorarium. The disbursement of the amount to the respective genuine depositors of the Sahara Group of Cooperative Societies out of the aforesaid amount of Rs. 5,000 Crores shall be made at the earliest but not later than nine months from the date of the judgement.

The Supreme Court's judgement is a significant step towards securing the rights of depositors of the Sahara Group of Cooperative Societies and ensuring transparency and fairness in the disbursement of funds.

Pinak Pani Mohanty Vs. Union of India and Ors

Latest Legal News