Punjab-Haryana High Court
Suparna Bhalla vs State Of Punjab And Others on 7 April, 2025
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:048710
CRM-M-19034-2025 -1-
136
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-19034-2025 (O&M)
Date of decision: 07.04.2025
Suparna Bhalla
... Petitioner
Vs.
State of Punjab and others
... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR
Present: Mr. Puneet Bali, Sr. Advocate with
Mr. P.S. Ahluwalia, Advocate,
Mr. Vipul Joshi, Advocate,
Mr. Sowjhanya Satija, Advocate,
Mr. Aakash Sharma, Advocate and
Mr. Piyush Kumar, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Subhash Godara, Addl. A.G., Punjab.
Mr. Satya Prakash Yadav, Advocate
for respondents No.2 & 3.
*******
HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J.(Oral)
1. Present petition has been preferred under Section 528 of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking quashing of FIR No.7 dated
15.01.2025 under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘IPC‘),
registered at Police Station IT City, Mohali, District SAS Nagar (Mohali) and
1 of 19
::: Downloaded on – 10-04-2025 02:27:20 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:048710
CRM-M-19034-2025 -2-
all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
2. Briefly, the facts of the case, as alleged, are that husband of the
petitioner is a promoter of WTC, Noida Development Company Private
Limited (for short ‘WTC’). In the year 2015, the said company launched a
commercial project in Mohali namely WTC Chandigarh and in the year 2022,
complainants-respondents No.2 & 3 were allured to invest an amount of
Rs.50,23,203/- in the same. The units hence purchased by respondents No.2 &
3 were scheduled to be handed over by June, 2023. However, they were unable
to take possession of the same, as the construction never picked pace, in spite
of multiple re-assurances. A report dated 07.12.2022 prepared by the Serious
Fraud Investigation Office (for short ‘SFIO’), which was presented before
National Company Law Tribunal, Delhi, also states that the accused company
has collected about Rs.423 crores from 1162 clients. However, instead of
putting it towards construction of the real estate project, as promised, they have
siphoned off Rs.77 crores. In fact, in April, 2023, Greater Mohali Area
Development Authority (for short ‘GMADA’) had to revoke the land allotment,
as the accused company had an overdue of Rs.103 crores. As such, the accused
company has defrauded respondents No.2 & 3 and all its other clients.
CONTENTIONS
3. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that
the petitioner has been wrongly arraigned as an accused in FIR (supra). Even if
2 of 19
::: Downloaded on – 10-04-2025 02:27:20 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:048710
CRM-M-19034-2025 -3-
the case of the prosecution is presumed to be correct, no offence is made out
against the petitioner. The petitioner has never been a Director or even a
shareholder in the accused company. In fact, neither she has been named in the
FIR (supra) nor any specific allegation has been levelled against her. Further,
nowhere it has been alleged that the petitioner deceived respondents No.2 & 3
or dishonestly induced them to part with their money, as she did not have any
role in the day to day functioning of the accused company. As a matter of fact,
the petitioner is a reputed architect, who is involved with many prestigious
projects.
4. Further still, a perusal of the investigation report submitted by
SFIO would indicate that the petitioner was held to be not complicit in the
alleged occurrence. The issue primarily is civil in nature, which has been given
a criminal colour and the petitioner has only been arraigned as an accused to
twist arm of her husband-Ashish Bhalla. Pertinently, the petitioner cannot be
held to be vicariously liable in the present case, especially when the petitioner
is neither a Director nor an owner in the accused company. Further, the
unimpeachable and sterling evidence in the shape of relevant corporate record
pertaining to management of WTC, as extracted from the records of Ministry
of Corporate Affairs, is available on record as Annexure P-2 and bare perusal
of the same would establish that the petitioner has never held any directorship
or managerial position in WTC. Her firm namely Abaxial Design Pvt. Ltd. is a
separate legal entity and has no connection with WTC. As such, neither the
3 of 19
::: Downloaded on – 10-04-2025 02:27:20 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:048710
CRM-M-19034-2025 -4-
petitioner nor her firm can be held responsible for any wrongdoings, that may
have been committed by WTC. Reliance in this regard is placed upon Sunil
Bharti Mittal Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation, 2015 (1) SCALE 140.
Learned senior counsel for the petitioner also relies upon a judgment of the
Hon’ble Supreme Court in Vesa Holdings (P) Ltd. Vs. State of Kerala, (2015)
8 SCC 293 and contends that the present dispute is civil in nature and is being
converted into a criminal offence with malicious intentions.
5. Pertinently, in Vinay Tyagi Vs. Irshad Ali, (2013) 5 SCC 762, the
Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that fair and proper investigation is essential
component of criminal jurisprudence and as such, the investigation must be
conducted in a fashion, that is unbiased, honest and just, in order to bring out
the truth. However, in the present case, continuation of criminal investigation
against the petitioner is grossly unjust. She has been framed in two FIRs;
firstly, in the FIR (supra) and thereafter, in FIR No.21 dated 15.02.2025 under
Sections 406, 420, 120-B of IPC, registered at Police Station IT City, Mohali,
District SAS Nagar (Mohali), in spite of the fact that she has no association
with the accused firm. Learned senior counsel relies on Arnab Goswami Vs.
Union of India, (2020) 14 SCC 12 and submits that multiple FIRs on the same
set of allegations are not permissible. He further relies on a judgment of the
Hon’ble Supreme Court in Imran Pratapgadhi Vs. State of Gujarat and
another, 2025 INSC 410 and submits that there is no embargo on quashing of
an FIR, even when the investigation is pending conclusion.
4 of 19
::: Downloaded on – 10-04-2025 02:27:20 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:048710
CRM-M-19034-2025 -5-
6. Per contra, learned counsel for respondents No.2 & 3 submits that
present petition is premature. 1162 persons have been cheated of Rs.423
crores. Further, 95% of the total sale price have been collected from 1250
allottees, by cheating the innocent citizens. The intention to cheat from the
very inception is writ large, as the accused, after obtaining 95% amount of the
total project price from victims, have not even paid the installments for the
land allotment to GMADA, which has cancelled allotment of the land. In the
similar manner, gullible customers have been induced to invest in other States
as well. Learned counsel for respondents No.2 & 3 refers to Press Release
dated 03.03.2025 issued by Directorate of Enforcement (for short ‘ED’),
Gurugram Zonal Office, which is taken on record as Mark ‘A’. Learned
counsel refers to the press release and submits that investigation against the
petitioner along with her husband Ashish Bhalla and her brother-in-law
Abhijeet Bhalla has been launched for money laundering. The petitioner has
been summoned by ED number of times. Moreover, documents relating to
funds collection of more than Rs.3500 crores from various investors have been
found. Further, the investigation is still going on into the well orchestrated
ponzi schemes and creation of assets in the name of other entities and
siphoning off the fund abroad. Further still, in the Press Release, it has been
specifically mentioned that more than Rs.200 crores have been siphoned off to
other countries for acquiring the overseas assets. The press release dated
03.03.2025 would indicate that the petitioner has been mentioned as an
5 of 19
::: Downloaded on – 10-04-2025 02:27:20 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:048710
CRM-M-19034-2025 -6-
accused and a promoter. The ED had identified assets worth thousands of
crores in the name of the accused company and the matter is currently under
further investigation. The transit bail sought by the petitioner has already been
dismissed and certified copy of the order dated 26.03.2025 passed by learned
Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), South-East, Saket Court
Complex, New Delhi has been produced in the Court today, which is taken on
record as Mark ‘B’. Learned counsel for respondents No.2 & 3 refers to the
aforementioned order and submits that in the affidavit dated 28.09.2022
submitted by SFIO before Delhi High Court, massive diversion of funds by
WTC is confirmed. Learned counsel further contends that the petitioner is fully
involved in the fraud and she personally controlled the Directors through one
M/s Proactive Constructions Pvt. Ltd. She is also instrumental in inflating the
construction cost for siphoning off the money collected from the investors
including the complainant and had been issuing false certificates to hoodwink
the statutory authorities. Other associates in the projects like architects, sales
persons and accountants report directly to the petitioner. Furthermore, after the
arrest of her husband and her brother-in-law, she is managing everything and
respondents No.2 & 3 have serious apprehension that she would also divert the
funds collected from other investors.
7. Learned State counsel opposes the prayer made by the petitioner
on the ground that FIR is not an encyclopedia. The registration of FIR is only
an initial step towards setting the criminal law into motion. The investigating
6 of 19
::: Downloaded on – 10-04-2025 02:27:20 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:048710
CRM-M-19034-2025 -7-
agency is in the process of collecting more evidence and the present petition is
filed only to stop the investigating agency from making recoveries of the
relevant documents and electronic devices in the possession of the petitioner.
The petitioner is evading all attempts of service of notices issued by the
investigating agency. In the present case, thousand of investors have been
defrauded and there is huge public outrage in this regard.
8. Learned State counsel further submits that huge fraud has been
committed, which has impacted the lives of 1162 victims, who have lost their
hard earned life savings. It would only be revealed after completion of the
investigation, who is beneficiary of such serious economic fraud. The
investigating agency is yet to take into possession the relevant documents and
details of other assets. Further, it is immaterial that the petitioner has never
been a Director of WTC and she is not vicariously liable. The offence
committed in the present case is not under Section 138 of the Negotiable
Instruments Act, 1881 or the Drug and Cosmetics Act by corporate entity. As
such, reliance of the petitioner on Vesa Holdings‘s (supra) and Sunil Bharti
Mittal‘s case (supra) is totally misplaced. Further, in view of Section 242 of
BNSS (erstwhile Section 219 of Cr.P.C.), offence committed by the accused
under the same transaction upto 05 complaints can be clubbed together and
present FIR is registered prior in time than FIR No.21, which was registered on
15.02.2025, whereas FIR (supra) was registered on 15.01.2025 and in both the
FIRs, victims are different and are registered in view of the provisions
7 of 19
::: Downloaded on – 10-04-2025 02:27:20 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:048710
CRM-M-19034-2025 -8-
contained in Section 242 of BNSS (erstwhile Section 219 of Cr.P.C.). As such,
reliance of the petitioner on Arnav Goswami‘s case (supra) would not be of
any help. The investigating agency is conducting the investigation in a free,
fair and transparent manner and nothing specific has been pleaded that the
investigation is biased or tainted. The questioning of the petitioner is essential
for unearthing the huge economic fraud committed upon 1162 victims. The
accused in the present case have committed an offence in a pre-determined and
calculated manner. The complicity or innocence of the petitioner would only be
determined after taking into possession the relevant documents and upon
conclusion of the investigation. The Directorate of Enforcement has not
arrested the petitioner but that would not be a ground to quash the FIR (supra)
at the threshold. The investigating agency cannot be deprived of its statutory
right to investigate and unearth the fraud so as to ascertain the manner in which
the hard-earned money worth several hundreds of crores has been siphoned off
by the accused. The petitioner is also in possession of the documents and other
material necessary for the proper and fair investigation. Learned State counsel
relies upon judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Satvinder Kaur Vs.
State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi), (1999) 8 SCC 728 and M/s Neeharika
Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Maharastra, AIR 2021 SC 1918 and
submits that no ground for setting aside the investigation at the threshold is
made out and the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is imperative to take
the investigation to its logical end.
8 of 19
::: Downloaded on – 10-04-2025 02:27:20 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:048710
CRM-M-19034-2025 -9-
OBSERVATIONS
9. Having heard learned counsel for the parties at considerable length
and after perusing the record of the case with their able assistance, it transpires
that 1162 persons have been induced to pay 95% of the total price of the
property, which they intended to purchase. However, the accused have not even
paid the installments, they owed to GMADA towards allotment of land.
Further, learned counsel for the petitioner has made a rather misplaced
argument that the petitioner has no concern with the alleged offence, as there is
no allegation against her in the FIR (supra) and as such, she cannot be held
vicariously liable.
10. It is trite law that an FIR is not the encyclopedia of the entire
prosecution case and its purpose is limited to setting the criminal law into
motion. Pertinently, the case at hand does not pertain to corporate liability,
rather, it is a serious economic fraud, committed in a pre-planned manner with
an intention to cheat and deceive thousands of gullible investors. Due to its
unique characteristics and wider ramifications, economic offences form a
special and separate category within the realm of criminal jurisprudence and
stand on a different pedestal than other conventional criminal offences. Such
offences have significant cascading effects not only on the lives of the victims,
but also on the economic stability of the State. Furthermore, such transactions
often form a part of grand scale money laundering operations. In the present
case, an ECIR has already been registered by Directorate of Enforcement
9 of 19
::: Downloaded on – 10-04-2025 02:27:20 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:048710
CRM-M-19034-2025 -10-
alleging money laundering on part of the accused, including the petitioner, as
well as diversion of funds to foreign countries. Allowing such activities to
continue unchecked would be detriment to larger interest of the society and
contribute towards creating serious repercussions contributing to recession-like
circumstances.
11. The investigation into such frauds must be conducted in an
objective manner, or else providing assistance and justice to the victims can
become even more cumbersome, as there is every likelihood that their
investments are diverted elsewhere. Time and again, the Hon’ble Supreme
Court has reiterated that the accused persons in such scams should face the full
force of law and any show of leniency towards them would create a sense of
fear in the minds of people and discourage them from investing their money in
real estate projects. Importantly, it will further erode the faith and trust of the
common man in the justice delivery mechanism. As such, collection of proper
evidence during investigation is even more imperative in white color crimes so
that offenders do not take advantage of any technical loopholes.
12. Of late, economic offences have become increasingly prevalent,
attracting public attention, with many high profile cases coming to the fore.
Therefore, a robust and pragmatic approach is warranted to combat this rising
trend of deceitful manipulation, particularly involving real estate. An objective
investigation is of the utmost importance to inquire into these sophisticated
financial frauds, as they call for scrupulous unearthing of the modus operendi.
10 of 19
::: Downloaded on – 10-04-2025 02:27:20 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:048710
CRM-M-19034-2025 -11-
Commonly, the perpetrators of economic offences evade responsibility by
hiding behind the corporate veil and attempt to swoop the illicit gains made by
them by engaging in illegal practices like money laundering and tax evasion
under the rug. These offences, more often than not, involve complex
mechanisms and pertain to multiple jurisdictions, which falls beyond the scope
of traditional investigating tools. Therefore, the Courts are under an obligation
to take a sophisticated approach, illustrating even higher standards of care, so
as to ensure that the perpetrators do not take advantage of technical loopholes
in the legal framework.
13. A two Judge Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Y.S. Jagan
Mohan Reddy Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation, (2013) 7 SCC 439 has
highlighted the impact of economic offences and their large scale impact on
many victims, necessitating strict scrutiny. Speaking through Justice P.
Sathasivam, the following was opined:
“15. Economic offences constitute a class apart and need to be
visited with a different approach in the matter of bail. The
economic offence having deep rooted conspiracies and involving
huge loss of public funds needs to be viewed seriously and
considered as grave offences affecting the economy of the country
as a whole and thereby posing serious threat to the financial
health of the country.
16. While granting bail, the court has to keep in mind the nature of
accusations, the nature of evidence in support thereof, the severity
of the punishment which conviction will entail, the character of
the accused, circumstances which are peculiar to the accused,
reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused at
the trial, reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered11 of 19
::: Downloaded on – 10-04-2025 02:27:20 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:048710CRM-M-19034-2025 -12-
with, the larger interests of the public/State and other similar
considerations.”
14. Further still, a three Judge Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in
Vijay Madanlal Choudhary and others Vs. Union of India and others, 2022
SCC OnLine SC 929, speaking through through Justcie A.M. Khanwilkar,
observed as follows:
“298. In Mohanlal Jitamalji Porwal, while explaining the impact
of economic offences on the community, the Court observed that
usually the community view the economic offender with a
permissive eye, although the impact of the offence is way greater
than that of offence of murder. The Court held thus:
“5…..The entire Community is aggrieved if the economic
offenders who ruin the economy of the State are not brought to
books. A murder may be committed in the heat of moment upon
passions being aroused. An economic offence is committed with
cool calculation and deliberate design with an eye on personal
profit regardless of the consequence to the Community. A
disregard for the interest of the Community can be manifested
only at the cost of forfeiting the trust and faith of the
Community in the system to administer justice in an even
handed manner without fear of criticism from the quarters
which view white collar crimes with a permissive eye unmindful
of the damage done to the National Economy and National
Interest.”
(emphasis supplied)
In Rohit Tandon, this Court observed as follows:-
“21. The consistent view taken by this Court is that economic
offences having deep-rooted conspiracies and involving huge
loss of public funds need to be viewed seriously and considered
as grave offences affecting the economy of the country as a
whole and thereby posing serious threat to the financial health
of the country. Further, when attempt is made to project the
proceeds of crime as untainted money and also that the
allegations may not ultimately be established, but having been
made, the burden of proof that the monies were not the proceeds12 of 19
::: Downloaded on – 10-04-2025 02:27:20 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:048710CRM-M-19034-2025 -13-
of crime and were not, therefore, tainted shifts on the accused
persons under Section 24 of the 2002 Act.”
(emphasis supplied)
Thus, it is well settled by the various decisions of this Court
and policy of the State as also the view of international
community that the offence of money-laundering is committed
by an individual with a deliberate design with the motive to
enhance his gains, disregarding the interests of nation and
society as a whole and which by no stretch of imagination can
be termed as offence of trivial nature. Thus, it is in the interest
of the State that law enforcement agencies should be provided
with a proportionate effective mechanism so as to deal with
these types of offences as the wealth of the nation is to be
safeguarded from these dreaded criminals. As discussed
above, the conspiracy of money-laundering, which is a three-
staged process, is hatched in secrecy and executed in darkness,
thus, it becomes imperative for the State to frame such a
stringent law, which not only punishes the offender
proportionately, but also helps in preventing the offence and
creating a deterrent effect.” (emphasis added)
15. It is a well settled legal position that the Courts should not
normally interfere with an investigation and permit the same to be completed,
as such intervention could amount to encroachment upon the lawful power of
the police to investigate into cognizable offences, which would undermine the
due process of law. Reliance in this regard can be placed upon the judgment
rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Satvinder Kaur‘s case (supra).
Pertinently, in M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd.‘s case (supra), a three
Judge Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court reiterated the guiding principles to
quash proceedings under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. speaking through Justice M.R.
Shah, the following was held:
13 of 19
::: Downloaded on – 10-04-2025 02:27:20 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:048710CRM-M-19034-2025 -14-
“80. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, our
final conclusions on the principal/core issue, whether the High
Court would be justified in passing an interim order of stay of
investigation and/or “no coercive steps to be adopted”, during the
pendency of the quashing petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C , 1973
and/or under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and in what
circumstances and whether the High Court would be justified in
passing the order of not to arrest the accused or “no coercive steps
to be adopted” during the investigation or till the final
report/chargesheet is filed under Section 173 Cr.P.C., 1973 while
dismissing/disposing of/not entertaining/not quashing the criminal
proceedings/complaint/FIR in exercise of powers under Section
482 Cr.P.C., 1973 and/or under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, our final conclusions are as under:
i) Police has the statutory right and duty under the relevant
provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure contained in
Chapter XIV of the Code to investigate into a cognizable
offence;
ii) Courts would not thwart any investigation into the
cognizable offences;
iii) It is only in cases where no cognizable offence or offence of
any kind is disclosed in the first information report that
the Court will not permit an investigation to go on;
iv) The power of quashing should be exercised sparingly with
circumspection, as it has been observed, in the `rarest of rare
cases (not to be confused with the formation in the context of
death penalty).
v) While examining an FIR/complaint, quashing of which is
sought, the court cannot embark upon an enquiry as to the
reliability or genuineness or otherwise of the allegations made
in the FIR/complaint;
vi) Criminal proceedings ought not to be scuttled at the initial
stage;
vii) Quashing of a complaint/FIR should be an exception rather
14 of 19
::: Downloaded on – 10-04-2025 02:27:20 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:048710CRM-M-19034-2025 -15-
than an ordinary rule;
viii) Ordinarily, the courts are barred from usurping the
jurisdiction of the police, since the two organs of the State
operate in two specific spheres of activities and one ought not
to tread over the other sphere;
ix) The functions of the judiciary and the police are
complementary, not overlapping;
x) Save in exceptional cases where non-interference would
result in miscarriage of justice, the Court and the judicial
process should not interfere at the stage of investigation of
offences;
xi) Extraordinary and inherent powers of the Court do not
confer an arbitrary jurisdiction on the Court to act according to
its whims or caprice;
xii) The first information report is not an encyclopaedia which
must disclose all facts and details relating to the offence
reported. Therefore, when the investigation by the police is in
progress, the court should not go into the merits of the
allegations in the FIR. Police must be permitted to complete the
investigation. It would be premature to pronounce the
conclusion based on hazy facts that the complaint/FIR does not
deserve to be investigated or that it amounts to abuse of process
of law. After investigation, if the investigating officer finds that
there is no substance in the application made by the
complainant, the investigating officer may file an appropriate
report/summary before the learned Magistrate which may be
considered by the learned Magistrate in accordance with the
known procedure;
xiii) The power under Section 482 Cr.P.C., 1973 is very wide,
but conferment of wide power requires the court to be more
cautious. It casts an onerous and more diligent duty on
the court ;
xiv) However, at the same time, the court , if it thinks fit, regard
being had to the parameters of quashing and the self-restraint
imposed by law, more particularly the parameters laid down by
this Court in the cases of R.P. Kapur (supra) and Bhajan Lal
15 of 19
::: Downloaded on – 10-04-2025 02:27:20 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:048710
CRM-M-19034-2025 -16-
(supra), has the jurisdiction to quash the FIR/complaint;
xv) When a prayer for quashing the FIR is made by the
alleged accused and the court when it exercises the power
under Section 482 Cr.P.C., 1973 only has to consider whether
the allegations in the FIR disclose commission of a cognizable
offence or not. The court is not required to consider on merits
whether or not the merits of the allegations make out a
cognizable offence and the court has to permit the
investigating agency/police to investigate the allegations in the
FIR;
xvi) The aforesaid parameters would be applicable and/or the
aforesaid aspects are required to be considered by the
High Court while passing an interim order in a quashing
petition in exercise of powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., 1973
and/or under Article 226 of the Constitution of India . However,
an interim order of stay of investigation during the pendency of
the quashing petition can be passed with circumspection. Such
an interim order should not require to be passed routinely,
casually and/or mechanically. Normally, when the investigation
is in progress and the facts are hazy and the entire
evidence/material is not before the High Court , the
High Court should restrain itself from passing the interim order
of not to arrest or “no coercive steps to be adopted” and the
accused should be relegated to apply for anticipatory bail
under Section 438 Cr.P.C., 1973 before the competent court .
The High Court shall not and as such is not justified in passing
the order of not to arrest and/or “no coercive steps” either
during the investigation or till the investigation is completed
and/or till the final report/chargesheet is filed under
Section 173 Cr.P.C., 1973 while dismissing/disposing of the
quashing petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., 1973 and/or under
Article 226 of the Constitution of India .
xvii) Even in a case where the High Court is prima facie of the
opinion that an exceptional case is made out for grant of
interim stay of further investigation, after considering the broad
parameters while exercising the powers under
Section 482 Cr.P.C., 1973 and/or under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India referred to hereinabove, the
High Court has to give brief reasons why such an interim order
is warranted and/or is required to be passed so that it can
16 of 19
::: Downloaded on – 10-04-2025 02:27:20 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:048710
CRM-M-19034-2025 -17-
demonstrate the application of mind by the Court and the
higher forum can consider what was weighed with the
High Court while passing such an interim order.
xviii) Whenever an interim order is passed by the High Court of
“no coercive steps to be adopted” within the aforesaid
parameters, the High Court must clarify what does it mean by
“no coercive steps to be adopted” as the term “no coercive steps
to be adopted” can be said to be too vague and/or broad which
can be misunderstood and/or misapplied.” (emphasis added)
16. As far as the argument qua vicarious liability is concerned, it is
correct that when the offence pertains to certain statues, the accused can take
advantage of material, that is incontrovertible and sterling in nature, in order to
prove that their arraignment is unjustified. However, the FIR (supra) pertains
to an offence under Section 420 of IPC, which is a serious economic offence,
with long-term and far-reaching consequences, as compared to the statues like
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Insecticides Act, 1969 etc. In the present
case, wrongful loss, to the tune of hundreds of crores, has been caused to as
many as 1162 innocent investors, who had placed their trust and lifetime
savings in the hands of the accused company. The petitioner might not have
been an office-bearer or a shareholder, however, that does not mechanically
makes her irrelevant to the present case. As such, master data (Annexure P-2)
from the Ministry of Corporate Affairs does not come to the rescue of the
petitioner and therefore, this Court is of the considered view that interference,
at this stage, is thoroughly unwarranted, as investigation is still underway. The
role of the petitioner, if any, will be determined post-conclusion of the
17 of 19
::: Downloaded on – 10-04-2025 02:27:20 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:048710
CRM-M-19034-2025 -18-
investigation. Moreover, it is probable that intervention at this juncture
enhances the misery of the victims of this fraud and pulls them further away
from justice.
17. Since the complicity of the accused and the extent thereof can
only come to the fore, once the investigation process is complete, it must be
allowed to take its natural course for the truth to be unearthed. Meanwhile, this
Court must not engage with the probable defence of the petitioner. Recently, a
two Judge Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Anil Bhavarlal Jain’s case
(supra), speaking through Justice Prasanna B. Varale, the following was
opined:
“16. Another reference can be made to the judgment of this Court
in Parbatbhai Aahir v. State of Gujrat and Anr. (2017) SCC
Online SC 1189 wherein it was observed that, economic offenses
involving financial and economic well-being of the state have
implications which lie beyond the domain of a mere dispute
between the private disputants. The High Court would be
justified in declining to quash where the offender is involved in
an activity akin to a financial or economic fraud or
misdemeanour. The consequences of the act complained of upon
the financial or economic system will weigh in the balance.
Thus, it can be concluded that economic offences by their very
nature stand on a different footing than other offences and have
wider ramifications. They constitute a class apart. Economic
offences affect the economy of the country as a whole and pose a
serious threat to the financial health of the country. If such
offences are viewed lightly, the confidence and trust of the public
will be shaken.
17. A profitable reference in this regard can be made to the
judgment in State vs. R Vasanthi Stanley wherein this Court
declined to quash the proceedings in a case involving alleged
abuse of the financial system. It was observed as under:
18 of 19
::: Downloaded on – 10-04-2025 02:27:20 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:048710CRM-M-19034-2025 -19-
“15. A grave criminal offence or serious economic offence or
for that matter the offence that has the potentiality to create a
dent in the financial health of the institutions is not to be
quashed on the ground that there is delay in trial or the
principle that when the matter has been settled it should be
quashed to avoid the head on the system. That can never be an
acceptable principle or parameter, for that would amount to
destroying stem cells of law and order in many a realm and
further strengthen the marrow of unscrupulous litigations. Such
a situation should never be conceived of.” (emphasis added)CONCLUSION
18. Keeping in view the enormity of the fraud and the large number of
victims, a comprehensive in depth probe is imperative. As such, in view of the
facts and circumstances of the case as well as the ratio of law laid down by the
Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases referred to above, this Court finds no
ground to quash the FIR (supra). Accordingly, present petition is dismissed
19. All the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall stand
disposed of.
[ HARPREET SINGH BRAR ]
07.04.2025 JUDGE
vishnu
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
19 of 19
::: Downloaded on - 10-04-2025 02:27:20 :::