Criminal Appeal No.1000 OF 2007 (Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.3317 of
Dr. Arijit Pasayat , J. - Leave granted.
Challenge in this appeal is to the
order passed by a learned Single Judge of the Delhi High Court
dismissing the application filed by the appellants.
3. Challenge in the petition before
the High Court was to the order passed by a learned Additional District
and Sessions Judge, Tis Hazari Court, dismissing the Criminal Revision
Petition filed by the appellants.
4. Grievances in short were that one
M/s Habib Investments Ltd. incorporated under the Indian Companies Act,
1956 (in short the 'Act') advertised in various newspapers inviting the
general public to subscribe in various Fixed Deposits and saving
schemes. Since the schemes were very lucrative, many innocent persons
subscribed to the schemes. Various persons were appointed as agents on
commission basis to collect the money from subscribers. Many people who
were to get money complained of cheating stating that on the date of
maturity, the certificates issued were not honoured. First Information
Report was lodged with the Police Station, Lahori Gate, Delhi.
Initially, the application was filed for appointment of Receiver in
respect of M/s Habib Group of Companies and to make an order to attach
the properties. Five properties were attached. A public notice was
issued by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate directing attachment of
the properties. Grievance was made that notwithstanding the order of
attachment the properties were either disposed of or dealt with in a
manner contrary to the order of attachment.
5. The learned Additional District
and Sessions Judge rejected the application filed by the appellants on
the ground that they had no locus standi to file a revision petition.
The High Court by a single line order dismissed the petition filed
6. During the course of hearing of
the appeal, it was submitted by the non official respondents that they
are willing to dispose off the properties to meet the demands of the
creditors. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that after
having violated various orders passed, one of the non-official
respondents has now come to dispose off the properties to meet the
demands of creditors and to wipe out the liabilities. Ultimately, the
people who are the creditors have to get back their money. Without
entering into the matters relating to the commission of contempt, it
would be appropriate for the concerned Court to work out the modalities
as to how the properties can be sold to get the highest price so that
the dues of the creditors and the liabilities can be discharged.
7. Accordingly, we dispose of the
appeal directing the concerned Court to work out the details and the
modalities after hearing learned counsel for the parties so that the
amounts due to various persons towards creditors and liabilities to be
discharged, can be paid.
8. The appeal is accordingly
Print This Judgment