SUBRATA CHATTORAJ Vs UNION OF INDIA .
Bench: T.S. THAKUR,C. NAGAPPAN
Case number: W.P.(C) No.-000401-000401 / 2013
Diary number: 16359 / 2013
Advocates: SUBHASISH BHOWMICK Vs
Page 1
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITON (CIVIL) NO.401 OF 2013
Subrata Chattoraj …Appellant
Versus
Union of India & Ors. …Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITON (CIVIL) NO.402 OF 2013
AND
T.P. (C) NO.445 OF 2014
AND
WRIT PETITON (CIVIL) NO.413 OF 2013
Alok Jena …Appellant
Versus
Union of India & Ors. …Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITON (CIVIL) NO.324 OF 2014
1
Page 2
J U D G M E N T
T.S. THAKUR, J.
1. Writ Petitions seeking transfer of investigation from the
State Agencies to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI)
under the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, is by no
means uncommon in the High Courts in this country. Some,
if not most of such cases in due course travel to this Court
also, where, issues touching the powers of the High Courts
and at times the power of this Court to direct such transfers
are raised by the parties. The jurisdictional aspect is,
however, no longer res integra, the same having been
answered authoritatively by a Constitution Bench of this
Court in State of West Bengal & Ors. v. Committee for
Protection of Democratic Rights, West Bengal & Ors.
(2010) 3 SCC 571. This Court in that case was examining
whether the federal structure and the principles of
separation of powers, made it impermissible for the superior
courts to direct transfer of investigation from the State
Police to the CBI. Rejecting the contention, this Court held
2
Page 3
that power of judicial review itself being a basic feature of
the Constitution, the writ courts could issue appropriate writ,
directions and orders to protect the fundamental rights of
the citizens. This Court observed:
“51. The Constitution of India expressly confers the power of judicial review on this Court and the High Courts under Articles 32 and 226 respectively. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar described Article 32 as the very soul of the Constitution—the very heart of it—the most important article. By now, it is well settled that the power of judicial review, vested in the Supreme Court and the High Courts under the said articles of the Constitution, is an integral part and essential feature of the Constitution, constituting part of its basic structure. Therefore, ordinarily, the power of the High Court and this Court to test the constitutional validity of legislations can never be ousted or even abridged. Moreover, Article 13 of the Constitution not only declares the pre-Constitution laws as void to the extent to which they are inconsistent with the fundamental rights, it also prohibits the State from making a law which either takes away totally or abrogates in part a fundamental right. Therefore, judicial review of laws is embedded in the Constitution by virtue of Article 13 read with Articles 32 and 226 of our Constitution.
52. It is manifest from the language of Article 245 of the Constitution that all legislative powers of Parliament or the State Legislatures are expressly made subject to other provisions of the Constitution, which obviously would include the rights conferred in Part III of the Constitution. Whether there is a contravention of any of the rights so conferred, is to be decided only by the constitutional courts, which are empowered not only to declare a law as unconstitutional but also to enforce fundamental rights by issuing directions or orders or writs of or “in the nature of” mandamus, certiorari, habeas
3
Page 4
corpus, prohibition and quo warranto for this purpose.
53. It is pertinent to note that Article 32 of the Constitution is also contained in Part III of the Constitution, which enumerates the fundamental rights and not alongside other articles of the Constitution which define the general jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. Thus, being a fundamental right itself, it is the duty of this Court to ensure that no fundamental right is contravened or abridged by any statutory or constitutional provision. Moreover, it is also plain from the expression “in the nature of” employed in clause (2) of Article 32 that the power conferred by the said clause is in the widest terms and is not confined to issuing the high prerogative writs specified in the said clause but includes within its ambit the power to issue any directions or orders or writs which may be appropriate for enforcement of the fundamental rights. Therefore, even when the conditions for issue of any of these writs are not fulfilled, this Court would not be constrained to fold its hands in despair and plead its inability to help the citizen who has come before it for judicial redress (per P.N. Bhagwati, J. in Bandhua Mukti Morcha v.
Union of India (1984) 3 SCC 161).”
2. This Court summed up the conclusions in the following
words:
“68. Thus, having examined the rival contentions in the context of the Constitutional Scheme, we conclude as follows:
(i) The fundamental rights, enshrined in Part III of the Constitution, are inherent and cannot be extinguished by any Constitutional or Statutory provision. Any law that abrogates or abridges such rights would be violative of the basic structure doctrine. The actual effect and impact of the law on the rights guaranteed under Part III has to be taken into account in determining whether or not it destroys the basic structure.
4
Page 5
(ii) Article 21 of the Constitution in its broad perspective seeks to protect the persons of their lives and personal liberties except according to the procedure established by law. The said Article in its broad application not only takes within its fold enforcement of the rights of an accused but also the rights of the victim. The State has a duty to enforce the human rights of a citizen providing for fair and impartial investigation against any person accused of commission of a cognizable offence, which may include its own officers. In certain situations even a witness to the crime may seek for and shall be granted protection by the State.
(iii) In view of the constitutional scheme and the jurisdiction conferred on this Court under Article 32 and on the High Courts under Article 226 of the Constitution the power of judicial review being an integral part of the basic structure of the Constitution, no Act of Parliament can exclude or curtail the powers of the Constitutional Courts with regard to the enforcement of fundamental rights. As a matter of fact, such a power is essential to give practicable content to the objectives of the Constitution embodied in Part III and other parts of the Constitution. Moreover, in a federal constitution, the distribution of legislative powers between the Parliament and the State Legislature involves limitation on legislative powers and, therefore, this requires an authority other than the Parliament to ascertain whether such limitations are transgressed. Judicial review acts as the final arbiter not only to give effect to the distribution of legislative powers between the Parliament and the State Legislatures, it is also necessary to show any transgression by each entity. Therefore, to borrow the words of Lord Steyn, judicial review is justified by combination of "the principles of separation of powers, rule of law, the principle of constitutionality and the reach of judicial review".
(iv) If the federal structure is violated by any legislative action, the Constitution takes care to protect the federal structure by ensuring that Courts act as guardians and interpreters of the Constitution and provide remedy under Articles 32 and 226,
5
Page 6
whenever there is an attempted violation. In the circumstances, any direction by the Supreme Court or the High Court in exercise of power under Article 32 or 226 to uphold the Constitution and maintain the rule of law cannot be termed as violating the federal structure.
(v) Restriction on the Parliament by the Constitution and restriction on the Executive by the Parliament under an enactment, do not amount to restriction on the power of the Judiciary under Article 32 and 226 of the Constitution.
(vi) If in terms of Entry 2 of List II of The Seventh Schedule on the one hand and Entry 2A and Entry 80 of List I on the other, an investigation by another agency is permissible subject to grant of consent by the State concerned, there is no reason as to why, in an exceptional situation, court would be precluded from exercising the same power which the Union could exercise in terms of the provisions of the Statute. In our opinion, exercise of such power by the constitutional courts would not violate the doctrine of separation of powers. In fact, if in such a situation the court fails to grant relief, it would be failing in its constitutional duty.
(vii) When the Special Police Act itself provides that subject to the consent by the State, the CBI can take up investigation in relation to the crime which was otherwise within the jurisdiction of the State Police, the court can also exercise its constitutional power of judicial review and direct the CBI to take up the investigation within the jurisdiction of the State. The power of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution cannot be taken away, curtailed or diluted by Section 6 of the Special Police Act. Irrespective of there being any statutory provision acting as a restriction on the powers of the Courts, the restriction imposed by Section 6 of the Special Police Act on the powers of the Union, cannot be read as restriction on the powers of the Constitutional Courts. Therefore, exercise of power of judicial review by the High Court, in our opinion, would not amount to infringement of either the doctrine of separation of power or the federal structure.
6
Page 7
69. In the final analysis, our answer to the question referred is that a direction by the High Court, in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution, to the CBI to investigate a cognizable offence alleged to have been committed within the territory of a State without the consent of that State will neither impinge upon the federal structure of the Constitution nor violate the doctrine of separation of power and shall be valid in law. Being the protectors of civil liberties of the citizens, this Court and the High Courts have not only the power and jurisdiction but also an obligation to protect the fundamental rights, guaranteed by Part III in general and under Article 21 of the Constitution in particular, zealously and vigilantly”
(emphasis supplied)
3. Having said that this Court sounded a note of caution
against transfer of cases to CBI for mere asking and
observed:
“70. Before parting with the case, we deem it necessary to emphasise that despite wide powers conferred by Articles 32 and 226 of the Constitution, while passing any order, the Courts must bear in mind certain self-imposed limitations on the exercise of these Constitutional powers. The very plenitude of the power under the said Articles requires great caution in its exercise. In so far as the question of issuing a direction to the CBI to conduct investigation in a case is concerned, although no inflexible guidelines can be laid down to decide whether or not such power should be exercised but time and again it has been reiterated that such an order is not to be passed as a matter of routine or merely because a party has levelled some allegations against the local police. This extra- ordinary power must be exercised sparingly, cautiously and in exceptional situations where it becomes necessary to provide credibility and instill
7
Page 8
confidence in investigations or where the incident may have national and international ramifications or where such an order may be necessary for doing complete justice and enforcing the fundamental rights. Otherwise the CBI would be flooded with a large number of cases and with limited resources, may find it difficult to properly investigate even serious cases and in the process lose its credibility and purpose with unsatisfactory investigations.”
(emphasis supplied)
4. We may at this stage refer to a few cases in which this
Court has either directed transfer of investigation to the CBI
or upheld orders passed by the High Court directing such
transfer.
5. In Inder Singh v. State of Punjab (1994) 6 SCC
275 this Court was dealing with a case in which seven
persons aged between 14 to 85 were alleged to have been
abducted by a senior police officer of the rank of Deputy
Superintendent of Police in complicity with other policemen.
Since those abducted were not heard of for a considerable
period, a complaint was made against their abduction and
disappearance before the Director General of Police of the
State. It was alleged that the complaint was not brought to
the notice of the Director General of Police (Crime). Instead
8
Page 9
his P.A. had marked the same to the I.G. (Crime)
culminating in an independent inquiry through the
Superintendent of Police, Special Staff, attached to his
office. The report of the Superintendent of Police
recommended registration of a case against the officials
concerned under Section 364 of the IPC. Despite the said
recommendation no case was registered on one pretext or
the other against the concerned police officer till 23rd March,
1994. It was at this stage that a writ petition was filed
before this Court under Article 32 of the Constitution of India
for a fair, independent and effective investigation into the
episode. Allowing the petition this Court directed an
independent investigation to be conducted by the CBI into
the circumstances of the abduction of seven persons; their
present whereabouts or the circumstances of their
liquidation. An inquiry was also directed into the delay on
the part of the State Police in taking action between 25th
January 1992 when the complaint was first lodged and 23rd
March, 1994 when the case was finally registered.
9
Page 10
6. In R.S. Sodhi Advocate v. State of U.P. and Ors.
1994 (Supp) (1) SCC 143 this Court was dealing with a
petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India seeking
an independent investigation by the CBI into a police
encounter resulting in the killing of ten persons. The
investigation into the incident was being conducted at the
relevant point of time by an officer of the rank of Inspector
General level. The State Government also appointed a one-
member Commission headed by a sitting Judge of the
Allahabad High Court to inquire into the matter. This Court
found that since the local police was involved in the alleged
encounter an independent investigation by the CBI into what
was according to the petitioner a fake encounter, was
perfectly justified. This Court held that, however, faithfully
the police may carry out the investigation, the same will lack
‘credibility’ since the allegations against them are serious.
Such a transfer was considered necessary so that all those
concerned including the relatives of the deceased feel
assured that an independent agency was looking into the
matter thereby lending credibility to the outcome of the
investigation. This Court observed:
10
Page 11
“We have perused the events that have taken place since the incidents but we are refraining from entering upon the details thereof lest it may prejudice any party but we think that since the accusations are directed against the local police personnel it would be desirable to entrust the investigation to an independent agency like the Central Bureau of Investigation so that all concerned including the relatives of the deceased may feel assured that an independent agency is looking into the matter and that would lend the final outcome of the investigation credibility. However faithfully the local police may carry out the investigation, the same will lack credibility since the allegations are against them. It is only with that in mind that we having thought it both advisable and desirable as well as in the interest of justice to entrust the investigation to the Central Bureau of Investigation forthwith and we do hope that it would complete the investigation at an early date so that those involved in the occurrences, one way or the other, may be brought to book. We direct accordingly. In so ordering we mean no reflection on the credibility of either the local police or the State Government but we have been guided by the larger requirements of justice. The writ petition and the review petition stand disposed of by this order.”
(emphasis supplied)
7. A reference may also be made to State of Punjab v.
CBI (2011) 9 SCC 182 where the High Court of Punjab and
Haryana transferred an investigation from the State Police to
the CBI in relation to what was known as “Moga Sex
Scandal” case. The High Court had while ordering transfer of
the investigation found that several police officials, political
11
Page 12
leaders, advocates, municipal counsellors, besides a number
of persons belonging to the general public had been named
in connection with the case. The High Court had while
commending the investigation conducted by DIG and his
team of officials all the same directed transfer of case to CBI
having regard to the nature of the case and those allegedly
involved in the same. The directions issued by the High
Court were affirmed by this Court and the matter allowed to
be investigated by the CBI.
8. More recently, this Court in Advocates Association,
Bangalore, v. Union of India and Ors. (2013) 10 SCC
611 had an occasion to deal with the question of transfer of
an investigation from the State Police to the CBI in the
context of an ugly incident involving advocates, police and
media persons within the Bangalore City Civil Court
Complex. On a complaint filed by the Advocates’ Association,
Bangalore, before the Chief Minister for suitable action
against the alleged police atrocities committed on the
advocates, the Government of Karnataka appointed the
Director General of Police, CID, Special Unit and Economic
12
Page 13
Offences as an Inquiry Officer to conduct an in-house inquiry
into the matter. The Advocates’ Association at the same
time filed a complaint with jurisdictional police station,
naming the policemen involved in the incident. In addition,
the Registrar, City Civil Court also lodged a complaint with
the police for causing damage to the property of City Civil
Court, Bangalore by those indulged in violence. Several writ
petitions were then filed before the High Court, inter alia,
asking for investigation by the CBI. The High Court
constituted a Special Investigation Team (SIT) headed by
Dr. R.K. Raghvan, a retired Director CBI, as its Chairman
and others. The Advocates’ Association was, however,
dissatisfied with that order which was assailed before this
Court primarily on the ground that a fair investigation could
be conducted only by an independent agency like the CBI.
Relying upon the decision of this Court in State of West
Bengal v. Committee for Protection of Democratic
Rights (2010) 2 SCC 571 this Court directed transfer of
investigation to the CBI holding that the nature of the
incident and the delay in setting up of the SIT was sufficient
to warrant such a transfer.
13
Page 14
9. It is unnecessary to multiply decisions on the subject,
for this Court has exercised the power to transfer
investigation from the State Police to the CBI in cases where
such transfer is considered necessary to discover the truth
and to meet the ends of justice or because of the complexity
of the issues arising for examination or where the case
involves national or international ramifications or where
people holding high positions of power and influence or
political clout are involved. What is important is that while
the power to transfer is exercised sparingly and with utmost
care and circumspection this Court has more often than not
directed transfer of cases where the fact situations so
demand.
10. We are in the case at hand dealing with a major
financial scam nicknamed ‘Chit Fund Scam’ affecting lakhs of
depositors across several States in the Eastern parts of this
country. Affidavits and status reports filed in these
proceedings reveal that several companies were engaged in
the business of receiving deposits from the public at large.
The modus operandi of the companies involved in such Ponzi
14
Page 15
Schemes was in no way different from the ordinary except
that they appear to have evolved newer and more ingenious
ways of tantalizing gullible public to make deposits and
thereby fall prey to temptation and the designs of those
promoting such companies. For instance Saradha Group of
Companies which is a major player in the field, had floated
several schemes to allure the depositors to collect from the
market a sizeable amount on the promise of the depositors
getting attractive rewards and returns. These fraudulent
(Ponzi) schemes included land allotment schemes, flat
allotment schemes, and tours and travel schemes. The
group had floated as many as 160 companies although four
out of them were the front runners in this sordid affair. An
interim forensic audit report submitted to the SEBI by
Sarath & Associate, Chartered Accountants on 27th February,
2014 sums up in the following words, the background in
which the schemes are floated and the public defrauded :
“The company M/s Saradha Realty India Ltd. was involved in financial fraud involving in an attempt to deliberately mislead the general public by announcing dubious money multiplier schemes. It
15
Page 16
has also indulged in misleading the financial status of the group companies by incorrect disclosures in the financial statements in an attempt to deceive financial statement users and regulatory authorities.
The investors lured to extraordinary returns is typically attributed to something that sounds impressive but is intentionally vague, such as hedge fund in land, resorts, tours and travel plans, high yield investment programs.
Typical to the Ponzi schemes the investors who are economically very poor have invested relatively small amounts such as Rs.100 and wait to see if the promised returns are paid. After one month the investor received maturity amounts, so the investor truly believes s/he has earned the promised return. What the investor doesn’t realize is that the Rs.100 was a RETURN OF THE INVESTMENT AND NOT A RETURN ON THE INVESTMENT. In other words, the Rs.100 return came from the Rs.100 principal initially invested or from a newly-recruited investor, rather than from any profits generated by the investment opportunity. After a second month yields another Rs.100 payment, the investor is ‘hooked’ and typically will invest larger amounts in the scheme and will enthusiastically inform friends and family members about this ‘fantastic’ investment opportunity.
Since these early investors have actually received the promised returns, their promotion of the investment comes across as genuine and instills an almost irresistible urge in friends and family members to invest as well.
If pressed by skeptical investors for more detail, the promoters typically evade answering the question and instead talk about how recently-recruited investors have been receiving the promised returns.
16
Page 17
Since little, of the victims’ funds are actually invested into a legitimate profit-generating activity, the scheme continued for only as long as the cash inflows to existing investors. However, as the number of investors grown rapidly, the pool of new investors unavoidably shrinks. At one point, the cash flow situation collapsed resulting in four possible outcomes: (1) the investment promoters disappear, taking remaining investment money with them; (2) the scheme collapsed of its own weight, and the promoters have problems paying out the promised returns and, as the word spread, more people start asking for their money creating a run- on-the-bank situation; (3) the investment promoters turn themselves in and confess.”
11. The Report suggests that the investors were promised
very high returns by way of interest rate ranging from 10%
to 18%. The said returns promised to the depositors were,
according to the Report, too good to be true. The Report
also suggests that a very large number of ‘agents base’ was
created by the companies to extend the reach of these
companies. For Saradha Realty India Ltd. itself as many as
2,21,000 agents were working, who were paid an
unreasonably high brokerage of 30% of the instrument
which became the driving force for the agents to go that
extra mile to collect as much as possible. The Report
indicates that investments that matured for payment were
17
Page 18
paid out of the cash collected from new members which was
opposed to the normal business norms in which returns
ought to be paid out of profits earned in the business.
Besides, the cash collections were neither accurately shown
in the books of accounts, nor did the bank accounts reveal
the details of such cash collections. The Report states that
the company had no real intention of doing any legitimate
business activity and the money collected from the public
was spread over 160 companies and spent away or siphoned
off. No major revenue was seen to be generated by any
group company. The companies had opened too many bank
accounts for Round Tripping Transactions for the monies
collected by them. Apart from as many as 218 branches
spread over several States including West Bengal, Odisha,
Bihar, Assam and other States the companies had as many
as 347 bank accounts in 15 banks in the name of the Group
Companies. The bank accounts were opened at the location
of branches enabling deposit of the cash into accounts. The
daily cash collected less expenses was deposited at branch
account and the money pooled and transferred to other
accounts as per CMD’s instructions and utilized to issue the
18
Page 19
cheques. The Report also points out violation of the
Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992, the
Companies Act, 1956, The Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934
and the Income-Tax Act, 1961. It also points out fraudulent
certification, non-compliance of accounting standards,
material mis-statement of facts and gross negligence on the
part of the statutory Auditors. The Interim Report eventually
draws up the following conclusions:
“Saradha Reality India Ltd. and its other 3 group companies has collected money from the open market, reaching out to the general public by employing huge number of agents, in form of Investment under different Schemes viz., Fixed Deposits, Monthly Investment Scheme, Recurring Deposits. The SRIL has in pretext of land developers, construction of flats, running tours and travels, travel packages and resorts collected around Rs.2,459 crores over a period of 5 years.
SRIL has no valid registration under the SEBI Act for ‘collective Investment Scheme’ nor has licenced under RBI Act for Nidhi/Chit fund/NBFC. Its MOA also does not permit the company to collect monies in form of deposits. SEBI had passed a winding up order in view of the collection of monies under one of the company’s schemes as Collective Investment scheme on 23/4/2013.
Company management, with fraudulent intent, has designed several investment schemes wherein the depositors invested in expectation of high return. It has also misrepresented its business in writing to income Tax department, SEBI, and to its depositors.
19
Page 20
The Depositors are promised fixed interest returns but management has promised tours, travel packages, land purchases, flat advances etc. on the receipts which in realty is not intended to be given to the depositors.
The SRIL did not comply with the KYC norms while collecting the deposits, all the deposits are identified by names and addresses, but the ID or address proves are not obtained. The authenticity of the investors is difficult to prove as the deposits are not KYC complied.
The agents are main part of the entire operations of the company, in evolving the new schemes, explaining the public and collecting the deposits. The agents are operated as a tree (chain) and each agent in the chain will get commission on each deposit. These commissions are paid in priority from the business cash collected (almost 30% of collections) and the balance money is used for meeting company expenses and the rest is either deposited at the bank in the location of the branch or sent to Head Office. The cheques collected are directly deposited in the Bank. Other than Commission the agents are awarded field allowance, prizes, and performance bonuses forming around 30% of the total deposits collected.
SRIL has expanded rapidly its’ the business, takeovers in a very short span of five years. The Company has never utilised money so collected from investors for carrying out any legitimate business to earn returns to payback the investors. It has utilized the monies so collected in these takeovers, and venturing into new company for running the loss making businesses like media Channels, newspapers, Magazines, manufacturing automobiles. The group has incorporated 160 companies and the share capital monies, furniture & fixtures, plant and machines, huge staff salaries, fleet of cars on rent, buses, 320 branch premises’ rents, daily expenses,
20
Page 21
maintenance are all met through the deposits collected from the investors.
One of the company – Saradha Exports’ ha announced as it is expanding to international by exporting business and opening a branch at Madrid, SPAIN, on its website.
Al the group companies are debt-free companies; the loans standing in the Financial Statements are partly of investors, other group company loans and advances. The Audited Financial Statements are misrepresenting the facts and Statutory Auditor is grossly negligent in discharging his duty to present the true and fair view of the state of affairs of the companies. Most of the group company’s Auditor is common.
Since the deposits collected are not utilized for generating income, the monies are spent off and the Company soon has failed to return back the monies to depositors on their maturity. Cash rotation cycle of the depositors broke and has severe cash crunch and let the company to fall off.”
12. The Report estimates the collection made by the
Saradha Group of companies at Rs.2459 crores.
13. Failure of the group companies to refund the deposits
made with them was bound to as it indeed has led to a
public outcry against the scam on account of the huge
amount that was collected by these companies by
21
Page 22
defrauding a very large section of the public majority of
whom appear to be from middle class, lower middle class or
poorer sections of the society. The Government of West
Bengal acted in response to the protests and the public
anguish over a fraud of such colossal magnitude and set up
a Commission of Inquiry headed by Mr. Justice Shyamal
Kumar Sen, retired Chief Justice, Allahabad High Court with
four others to be nominated by the Government to inquire
into the matters set out in a notification dated 24th April,
2013 issued in that regard. The Commission was empowered
to receive all individual and public complaints regarding the
Saradha Group of Companies and other similar companies
involved in the scam and to forward such complaints to the
authorities concerned including the Special Investigation
Team for launching prosecution. The Commission was also
authorized to send directives to the Special Investigation
Team, identify the key persons responsible for the present
situation, quantify the estimated amount of money involved
in the alleged transactions, assess the assets and liabilities
of the group of companies and to recommend ways and
means for providing succor to those who had lost their
22
Page 23
savings. The Commission was also authorized to recommend
remedial action and measures to the State Government so
that such situations do not recur.
14. By another notification dated 27th August, 2013 the
Government, relying upon the directions issued by the High
Court of Calcutta in Writ Petition No.12163(W) of 2013 and
Writ Petition No.12197(W) of 2013 empowered the
Commission of Inquiry to dispose of all the assets belonging
to the Saradha Group of Companies and/or their agents
and/or their Benamidars and to adopt an appropriate mode
of recovery of debts on behalf of the Saradha Group from its
debtors and add the proceeds to the fund to be created for
that purpose. The Commission was also clothed with the
power to attach the bank accounts belonging to the Saradha
Group of Companies and the personal bank accounts of the
Directors apart from restraining the banks concerned from
allowing anyone to operate such accounts unless authorized
by the Commission. Pursuant to the above notifications the
Commission has received nearly 18 lakhs complaints and
23
Page 24
claim petitions demanding refund of the amount deposited
under such Ponzi Schemes.
15. In the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the State of
Bihar it is, inter alia, stated that the State Government has
announced a sum of rupees 500 crores for payment to the
aggrieved depositors apart from money that may be raised
from selling off the assets of the companies including the
Saradha Group of Companies. The affidavit further states
that the Commission has passed orders for payment of
compensation to the investors in the Saradha Group of
Companies and that over one lakh beneficiaries have been
paid while another 1,66,456 identified for such payment.
The affidavit also states that as per the directions issued by
the High Court of Calcutta in terms of the notification
mentioned above as many as 224 immovable properties and
54 vehicles have been identified for attachment and possible
sale and recovery of the amount due from the companies.
The affidavit goes on to say that one Kunal Kumar Ghosh,
Member of Parliament, Rajya Sabha, was arrested on 23rd
November, 2013 in connection with the case registered in
24
Page 25
Bidhannagar South Police Station after being interrogated on
several occasions. The said Kunal Kumar Ghosh was the
media CEO of Saradha Group of Companies. In addition one
Srinjoy Bose, Member of Parliament was also interrogated
by serious Fraud Investigation Office in relation to the
Saradha Group of Companies and that the Special
Investigating Team and the police authorities are extending
full support and cooperation to the Central Agencies like
Enforcement Directorate, Serious Fraud Investigation Office
etc. for effective investigation of the scam. The State has in
that view opposed the prayer of the petitioner for transfer of
the investigation from the State Police to the CBI.
16. When this case came up before us on 4th March, 2013
our attention was drawn by Mr. C.S. Vaidyanathan, Senior
counsel appearing for the State of West Bengal to a
statement appearing at page 474 of the said sur-rejoinder
filed by the State which according to the learned counsel
summarized the investments made by the Saradha group of
companies from out of the money collected by it from the
depositors. These details were sketchy and unsatisfactory
25
Page 26
especially when the trail of money collected remained
obscure no matter it was one of the important, if not the
single most important, angle to be investigated for
unraveling facts leading to the scam and identifying those
who had aided and/or abetted the same. Mr. Vaidhyanathan
was, therefore, granted ten days time to file a
comprehensive statement as to the amount collected by the
said group of companies and the expenditure
incurred/investments made over a period of time.
17. An affidavit was accordingly filed by the State of West
Bengal in which the purchase value of the property acquired
by Saradha Group of Companies was estimated at Rs.40
crores only as against a total collection of Rs.2,460 crores
made by the said companies. Mr. Vaidyanathan argued that
the investment in real estate could go upto Rs.110 crores on
the basis of the information gathered from the software that
was seized from the companies concerned. Even if that were
so a significant discrepancy existed between investigation
based estimated purchase value of the properties on the one
hand and what could according to Mr. Vaidyanathan emerge
26
Page 27
from the software seized from the companies. Mr.
Vaidyanathan argued that the discrepancy could be on
account of the fact that a large number of properties
referred to in the affidavit have been acquired by the
companies on the basis of power of attorneys which do not
indicate the value of the property covered by such deeds
and transactions. Be that as it may, a huge gap between the
amount collected and the investments made in real estate
itself calls for effective investigation as to the trail of money
collected by the group of companies. Investigation by the
State Police has not unfortunately made any significant
headway in this regard.
18. More importantly, the question whether the scam was
confined only to those who actively managed and
participated in the affairs of the companies or the same
flourished on account of the support and patronage of others
is an issue that has bothered us all through the hearing of
this case. We had, therefore, directed the State to file a
sample copy of the chargesheets said to have been
submitted before the jurisdictional Courts. A perusal of the
27
Page 28
copies so furnished shows that the same relate only to
individual deposits leaving untouched the larger conspiracy
angle that needs to be addressed. It was argued by Mr.
Bhattacharya that the Investigating Agency was deliberately
avoiding to investigate that vital aspect. Mr. Vaidyanathan,
however, contended that the larger conspiracy angle was
being investigated separately in an FIR registered with
Vidhannagar Police Station. He sought and was given time to
file an affidavit setting out the particulars of the FIR in which
the larger conspiracy angle was being examined and the
progress so far made in that regard.
19. An additional affidavit was accordingly filed by Mr.
Vaidyanathan in which it is, inter alia, stated that the larger
conspiracy angle is being investigated in Crime No.102
registered in Bidhannagar Police Station (North) on 6th May,
2013 under Sections 406, 409, 420, 120B IPC. At the
hearing of the case on 9th April, 2014 Mr. Vaidyanathan
passed on to us a sealed cover containing a list of persons
who according to the learned counsel need to be questioned
in view of the disclosers made and the evidence collected so
28
Page 29
far by the Investigating Agency. The basis on which the
Investigation Team has named the persons in the list was
not set out in the list or elsewhere. Mr. Vaidyanathan,
therefore, offered to file a synopsis of the evidence on the
basis whereof the names mentioned in the list had been
included in the said list and the evidence which incriminates
them calling for further investigation into their role and
conduct. An affidavit giving the synopsis was pursuant to
the said order filed by Mr. Vaidyanathan indicating briefly
the basis on which the persons named in the list were
sought to be interrogated in connection with the scam. A
perusal of the synopsis furnished and the names included in
the list makes it abundantly clear to us that several
important individuals wielding considerable influence within
the system at the State and the national level have been
identified by the Investigating Agency for interrogation. We
do not consider it necessary to reveal at this stage the
names of the individuals who are included in the list on the
basis of which the Investigating Agency proposes to
interrogate them or the material so far collected to justify
such interrogation. All that we need point out is that
29
Page 30
investigation into the scam is not confined to those directly
involved in the affairs of companies but may extend to
several others who need to be questioned about their role in
the sequence and unfolding of events that has caused
ripples on several fronts.
20. There is yet another aspect to which we must advert at
this stage. This relates to the role of the Regulatory
Authorities. Investigation conducted so far puts a question
mark on the role of regulatory authorities like SEBI,
Registrar of Companies and officials of the RBI within whose
respective jurisdictions and areas of operation the scam not
only took birth but flourished unhindered. The synopsis filed
by Mr. Vaidyanathan names some of the officials belonging
to these authorities and give reasons why their role needs to
be investigated. The synopsis goes to the extent of
suggesting that regular payments towards bribe were paid
through middleman to some of those who were supposed to
keep an eye on such ponzi companies. The Regulatory
Authorities, it is common ground, exercise their powers and
jurisdiction under Central legislations. Possible connivance
30
Page 31
of those who were charged with the duty of preventing the
scams of such nature in breach of the law, therefore, needs
to be closely examined and effectively dealt with.
Investigation into the larger conspiracy angle will, thus,
inevitably bring such statutory regulators also under
scrutiny.
21. It was at one stage argued on behalf of SEBI that
companies involved in the scam were doing chit-fund
business and since chit-funds were not within its jurisdiction
it could not have taken cognizance of the same. Our
attention was, however, drawn to atleast two orders passed
by SEBI directing winding up of such ponzi schemes and
refund of the amounts received by the companies concerned
to the depositors. It was submitted by learned Counsel for
the petitioner that the SEBI having examined the issue,
taken cognizance of the violation, no matter belatedly and
issued directions for winding up of the schemes and refund
of the amount, it was no longer open to it to argue that it
had no role to play in the matter.
31
Page 32
22. We are not in these proceedings required to
authoritatively pronounce upon the question whether SEBI
had the jurisdiction to act in the matter. What is important
is that if upon investigation it is found that SEBI did have
the jurisdiction to act in the matter but failed to do so then
such failure may tantamount to connivance and call for
action against those who failed to act diligently in the
matter. Suffice it to say, that the scam of this magnitude
going on for years unnoticed and unchecked, is suggestive
of a deep rooted apathy if not criminal neglect on the part of
the regulators who ought to do everything necessary to
prevent such fraud and public loot. Depending upon
whether the investigation reveals any criminal conspiracy
among those promoting the companies that flourished at the
cost of the common man and those who were supposed to
prevent such fraud calls for a comprehensive investigation
not only to bring those who were responsible to book but
also to prevent recurrence of such scams in future.
23. There is yet another dimension of the scam which
cannot be neglected. That the ponzi companies operated
32
Page 33
across State borders is evident not only from the pleadings
on record but also from the submissions urged in the course
of the arguments before us. What is significant is that these
companies and such other similar companies indulged in
similar fraudulent activities in the State of Assam and
Tripura also apart from Orissa where the depositors have
suffered. Looking to the nature of the scam and its inter-
State ramifications, cases registered in the State of Tripura
have since been transferred to the CBI for investigation at
the request of the State Government. A similar request has
been made by the Government of Assam which has,
according to Mr. Siddharth Luthra, learned Additional
Solicitor General, been accepted by the Central Government
who is shortly issuing a notification under which cases
concerning the scam registered in the State of Assam shall
stand transferred to the CBI.
24. That leaves us with the State of Odisha where too
Saradha Group of Companies and a host of similar other
companies appear to have indulged in similar activities
giving rise to considerable public resentment against the
33
Page 34
authorities for not preventing such companies from
defrauding the innocent public. Writ Petition (C) Nos.413 of
2013 and 324 of 2014 seek transfer of such cases registered
in the State of Odisha to the CBI on the analogy of what was
done in relation to Tripura and Assam keeping in view the
magnitude of the scam as also those involved, in the same.
25. In Writ Petition (C) No.413 of 2013 we had by our
order dated 26th March, 2014 confined the proceedings to 44
companies mentioned in two list one filed by Mr. Alok Jena,
the petitioner in the petition and the other by the Counsel
for the State Government. The involvement of these
companies in the scam had inter-state ramifications besides
the fact that their collections had exceeded over 500 cores
each.
26. It was submitted by counsel for the parties that looking
to the large number of cases that had been registered,
transfer of each and every case may work as an impediment
in the effective investigation of the cases by the CBI. For all
intents and purposes, therefore, proceedings in these two
writ petitions were confined to a prayer for transfer of cases
34
Page 35
registered against 44 companies named in the lists filed by
the counsel for the parties.
27. Since certain aspects of the information considered
relevant for the transfer of the cases was not forthcoming,
we had directed the State Government to file an affidavit
providing the said information. The information related
primarily to the number of companies involved in the scam
in the State of Odisha. The total amount allegedly collected
by 44 companies referred to in the lists furnished by the
State Counsel and Counsel for the petitioner. The total
number of claims made by the depositors before Justice R.K.
Patra Commission set up with the State Government as also
the total number of properties, seized in regard to the 44
companies referred to above. The total amount so far paid
to the investors under the orders or the Commission or
otherwise and the total number of charge-sheets so far filed.
Investments made in real estate or otherwise by the 44
companies were also demanded from the State who was
asked to disclose whether the larger conspiracy angle was
35
Page 36
being investigated and, if so, furnish the particulars of the
FIR in which that was being done.
28. An affidavit has been filed by the State of Odisha
pursuant to the said directions in which the FIRs where the
State Investigating Agency is examining the larger
conspiracy angle, have been identified. A perusal of the
Affidavit, further, shows that 163 companies were involved
in the chit-fund scam in the State of Odisha who have
collected Rs.4565 crores approximately from the public out
of which a sum of Rs.2904 crores has been collected by 43
companies mentioned in the list referred to earlier excluding
M/s Nabadiganta Capital Services Ltd. against which no
criminal case have been registered so far. The affidavit also
states that 7,45,293 envelopes containing claim petitions
have been received from the depositors by Justice R.K. Patra
Commission. The affidavit also gives details of the properties
of the companies seized/sealed in the course of the on-going
investigation. The affidavit also refers to payment of
Rs.24,17,65,866/- allegedly made to 18,596 investors by
M/s Prayag Infotech High Rise Limited, Kolkata and the
36
Page 37
willingness expressed by M/s Rose Valley Hotels and
Entertainment Limited to pay back the investors. Larger
conspiracy angle is according to the affidavit being examined
in three cases. These are (i) CID PS Case No.39 dated
18.07.2012 under Section 420/120-B IPC read with Sections
4, 5 and 6 of Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes
(Banning) Act, 1978 registered against M/s Seashore Group
of Companies, (ii) Case No.44 dated 07.02.2013 under the
same provisions registered in Kharavelnagar Police Station
(Bhubaneswar Urban Police District) against M/s Artha Tatwa
Group of Companies and (iii) EOW PS Case No.19 dated
06.06.2013 registered against M/s Astha International Ltd.
It was submitted that while charge sheets have been
submitted in three cases mentioned above within the period
of limitation, investigation has been kept open under Section
173 (8) of the Cr.P.C. to investigate the larger conspiracy
angle. The affidavit also refers to certain legislations enacted
in the State of Odisha to protect the interest of depositors.
It also refers to certain interim orders passed by the
Government for attachment of the properties of the
defaulting companies.
37
Page 38
29. Appearing for the State of Odisha, Mr. Gopal
Subramanium, learned Senior Counsel argued that while this
Court may transfer for further investigation into the cases
registered against 44 companies referred to above, any such
transfer should not hamper the attachment or recovery
process otherwise initiated by the State in terms of the
measures taken by it. It was also contended by Mr.
Subramanium that public prosecutors appointed by the CBI
would be assisted by the State Police Officials so that the
efficacy of the investigation and prosecution are both taken
care of by the joint efforts that the Central and the State
police authorities may make.
30. The factual narrative given in the foregoing paragraphs
clearly establish the following:
1. That financial scam nicknamed chit-fund scam that
has hit the States of West Bengal, Tripura, Assam
and Odisha involves collection of nearly 10,000
crores (approx.)from the general public especially
the weaker sections of the society which have fallen
prey to the temptations of handsome returns on such
38
Page 39
deposits extended by the companies involved in the
scam.
2. That investigation so far conducted suggests that the
collection of money from the depositors was neither
legally permissible nor were such collections/deposits
invested in any meaningful business activity that
could generate the high returns/promised to the
depositors.
3. That more than 25 lac claims have so far been
received by the Commissions of Enquiries set up in
the States of Odisha and West Bengal which is
indicative of the magnitude of scam in terms of
number of citizens that have been defrauded by the
ponzi companies.
4. That the companies indulge in ponzi schemes have
their tentacles in different States giving the scam
inter-state ramifications. That such huge collections
could have international money laundering
dimensions cannot be ruled out and needs to be
effectively investigated.
39
Page 40
5. That Investigation so far conducted reveals
involvement of several political and other influential
personalities wielding considerable clout and
influence.
6. That the role of regulators like SEBI, authorities
under the Companies Act and the Reserve Bank of
India is also under investigation by the State Police
Agency which may have to be taken to its logical
conclusion by an effective and independent
investigation.
31. The question is whether the above features call for
transfer of the ongoing investigation from the State Police to
the CBI. Our answer is in the affirmative. Each one of the
aspects set out above in our view calls for investigation by
an independent agency like the Central Bureau of
Investigation (CBI). That is because apart from the
sensitivity of the issues involved especially inter-state
ramifications of the scam under investigation, transfer of
cases from the State police have been ordered by this Court
40
Page 41
also with a view to ensure credibility of such investigation in
the public perception. Transfers have been ordered by this
Court even in cases where the family members of victim
killed in a firing incident had expressed apprehensions about
the fairness of the investigation and prayed for entrusting
the matter to a credible and effective agency like the CBI.
Investigation by the State Police in a scam that involves
thousands of crores collected from the public allegedly
because of the patronage of people occupying high positions
in the system will hardly carry conviction especially when
even the regulators who were expected to prevent or check
such a scam appear to have turned a blind eye to what was
going on. The State Police Agency has done well in making
seizures, in registering cases, in completing investigation in
most of the cases and filing charge-sheets and bringing
those who are responsible to book. The question, however,
is not whether the State police has faltered. The question is
whether what is done by the State police is sufficient to
inspire confidence of those who are aggrieved. While we do
not consider it necessary to go into the question whether the
State police have done all that it ought to have done, we
41
Page 42
need to point out that money trail has not yet been traced.
The collections made from the public far exceed the visible
investment that the investigating agencies have till now
identified. So also the larger conspiracy angle in the States
of Assam, Odisha and West Bengal although under
investigation has not made much headway partly because of
the inter-state ramifications, which the Investigating
Agencies need to examine but are handicapped in
examining.
32. M/s Vaidyanathan and Gopal Subramanium, learned
counsel for the States of West Bengal and Odisha
respectively argued that the CBI itself has in a great
measure lost its credibility and is no longer as effective and
independent as it may have been in the past. Similar
sentiments were expressed by Mr. P.V. Shetty appearing on
behalf of some of the investors and some other intervenors,
who followed suit to pursue a similar line of argument.
33. There is, in our opinion, no basis of the apprehension
expressed by the State Governments. It is true that a lot
can be said about the independence of CBI as a premier
42
Page 43
Investigating Agency but so long as there is nothing
substantial affecting its credibility it remains a premier
Investigating Agency. Those not satisfied with the
performance of the State Police more often than not demand
investigation by the CBI for it inspires their confidence. We
cannot, therefore, decline transfer of the cases only because
of certain stray observations or misplaced apprehensions
expressed by those connected with the scam or those likely
to be affected by the investigation. We may in this regard
gainfully extract the following passage from the decision of
this Court in Sanjiv Kumar v. State of Haryana and
Others (2005) 5 SCC 517, where this Court has lauded
the CBI as an independent agency that is not only capable of
but actually shows results:
“15. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, looking at the nature of the allegations made and the mighty people who are alleged to be involved, we are of the opinion, that the better option of the two is to entrust the matter to investigation by CBI. We are well aware, as was also told to us during the course of hearing, that the hands of CBI are full and the present one would be an additional load on their head to carry. Yet, the fact remains that CBI as a Central investigating agency enjoys independence and confidence of the people. It can fix its priorities and programme the progress of investigation suitably so as to see that any inevitable delay does not prejudice the
43
Page 44
investigation of the present case. They can think of acting fast for the purpose of collecting such vital evidence, oral and documentary, which runs the risk of being obliterated by lapse of time. The rest can afford to wait for a while. We hope that the investigation would be entrusted by the Director, CBI to an officer of unquestioned independence and then monitored so as to reach a successful conclusion; the truth is discovered and the guilty dragged into the net of law. Little people of this country, have high hopes from CBI, the prime investigating agency which works and gives results. We hope and trust the sentinels in CBI would justify the confidence of the people and this Court reposed in them.”
34. In the circumstances, we are inclined to allow all these
petitions and direct transfer of the following cases registered
in different police stations in the State of West Bengal and
Odisha from the State Police Agency to the Central Bureau
of Investigation (CBI):
A. State of West Bengal:
1. All cases registered in different police stations of the
State against Saradha Group of Companies including
Crime No.102 registered in the Bidhannagar Police
Station, Kolkata (North) on 6th May, 2013 for
44
Page 45
offences punishable under Sections 406, 409, 420
and 120B of the IPC.
2. All cases in which the investigation is yet to be
completed registered against any other company
upto the date of this order.
3. The CBI shall be free to conduct further investigation
in terms of Section 173 (8) of the Cr.P.C. in relation
to any case where a charge-sheet has already been
presented before the jurisdictional court against the
companies involved in any chit-fund scam.
B. State of Odisha :
All cases registered against 44 companies mentioned in
our order dated 26th March, 2014 passed in Writ
Petition (C) No.413 of 2013. The CBI is also permitted
to conduct further investigations into all such cases in
which chargesheets have already been filed.
35. We reserve liberty for the Joint Director CBI, Incharge
of the States of West Bengal and Odisha to seek further
directions in relation to transfer of any other case or cases
45
Page 46
that may require to be transferred for investigation to CBI
for a full and effective investigation into the scam.
36. Transfer of investigation to the Central Bureau of
Investigation (CBI) in terms of this order shall not, however,
affect the proceedings pending before the Commissions of
Enquiry established by the State Government or stall any
action that is legally permissible for recovery of the amount
for payment to the depositors. Needless to say that the
State Police Agencies currently investigating the cases shall
provide the fullest cooperation to the CBI including
assistance in terms of men and material to enable the latter
to conduct and complete the investigation expeditiously.
37. The Enforcement Directorate shall, in the meantime,
expedite the investigation initiated by it into the scam and
institute appropriate proceedings based on the same in
accordance with law.
38. We make it clear that nothing said in this order, shall
be taken as a final opinion as to the complicity of those
being investigated or others who may be investigated,
questioned or interrogated in relation to the scam.
46
Page 47
39. We do not for the present consider it necessary to
constitute a Monitoring Team to monitor the progress of the
investigation into the scam. But, we leave the exercise of
that option open for the future.
40. The Writ Petitions and T.P.(C) No. 445 of 2014 are
disposed of in terms of the above directions. No costs.
………………………………….…..…J. (T.S. THAKUR)
…………………………..……………..J. New Delhi, (C. NAGAPPAN) May 9, 2014
47