NEW DELHI: India's top court restored a cheating case lodged by the Gujarat Police against fugitive businessman Mehul Choksi and his wife Priti, and reversed a 2017 order of the state high court quashing the FIR against them.
According to the FIR registered in 2015 in Gujarat by complainant Digvijaysinh Himmatsinh Jadeja, Choksi and his wife stand accused of offences of forgery and cheating in connection with a business transaction involving 24 karat pure gold bars worth Rs 30 crore.
A two-judge bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and SVN Bhatti, in its November 29 verdict, set aside a May 5, 2017 order of the high court, and asked the police to proceed with its probe. It also made it clear that the observation in this current order shall not be treated as one on the case's merits.
The bench also remarked that the investigation would continue without the influence of any of the findings made in the impugned judgment or the present order.
The bench said these assertions by Jadeja were disputed factual questions and it would not go into these aspects. "We should not go into these aspects, as it is a matter to be considered and examined in the investigation. A wrong may be civil wrong or in a given case be a civil wrong and equally constitute a criminal offence," the bench said.
The apex court added the ingredients of a criminal offence should be satisfied and the court will refrain from making detailed observations about that. It said while conducting the probe, the investigating officer will keep in mind the rulings of the apex court and various high courts interpreting sections 406 (criminal breach of trust), 420 (cheating), 464 (forgery) and 465 (punishment for forgery) of the Indian Penal Code.
In 2015, Jadeja filed a complaint accusing Choksi's firm of failing to return 105 kg of gold bars worth Rs 30 crore and not paying a minimum guarantee of Rs 19.42 crore. Jadeja accused Choksi of committing a criminal breach of trust by misappropriating the property.
Choksi and his wife had moved the high court seeking quashing of the FIR on the ground that it was a civil dispute and their company had instituted a civil litigation in that regard.
The high court, while quashing the FIR, said it was a civil dispute and no criminal liability could be fastened on them. It had directed the civil court to expeditiously dispose of the suit before it within a period of one year. Aggrieved by the order, Jadeja challenged it in the apex court.
Claiming innocence in the case, Choksi had pled before SC that the agreements were not binding on the company Geetanjali Jewellery Retail Limited (GJRL), a subsidiary of Gitanjali Gems Limited. On the other hand, the appellant (Jadeja) contended that these agreements are valid and binding.
However, the Supreme Court reversed the High Court's judgment observing that it exceeded its jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).
The top court also said its attention was drawn to a paragraph in the judgement of the high court where an observation was made concerning Priti Mehul Choksi that a wife could not be said to be involved in a case against her husband vicariously.
"We believe that these observations are general observations to the effect that a wife/spouse could not be said to be involved vicariously. The appellant, Digvijaysinh Himmatsinh Jadeja, submits to the contrary. We would not like to make any comments as it is only upon investigation, that a specific role attributable to respondent, Priti Mehul Choksi, if any, would be ascertained," it said.
Choksi fled India in 2017 following the Punjab National Bank loan scam case. Choksi, along with his nephew Nirav Modi, have been accused of defrauding the bank to the tune of over Rs 14,000 crore.
(with additional inputs from PTI)