Definitely a case of quid pro quo: Supreme Court on CBI, Delhi Police's EOW probe on Indiabulls

The Supreme Court on Tuesday pulled up the CBI and Delhi Polices Economic Offence Wing EoW for being silent on allegations of dubious transactions involving Indiabulls Housing Finance Limited IHFL terming their conduct shocking and saying it appeared to be a case of quid pro quoA bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana criticised the Central Bureau of Investigation CBI for neither taking a final call on registering a regular case despite earlier directions nor filing a status report on the investigation carried out so farOwing to the negligence of CBI and EoW of Delhi Police in not even filing a status report and total failure to apprise this court about steps taken for registration of RC Regular Case for investigation we would have summoned the heads of these agencies but for the persuasion of ASG SV Raju who assures that needful will be done and status report will be filed within two weeks the bench said in its orderThe bench had initially directed the presence of the CBI director and Delhi Police commissioner in the court but deferred the move after Additional Solicitor General ASG Raju assured the court that a comprehensive affidavit and a status report would be filed within two weeksThis is a case which is very shocking to us Investigating agencies are keeping silent on the status of investigation in the case Definitely this is a case of quid pro quo They are completely silent file a status report CJI Kant saidAppearing for petitioner NGO Citizens Whistle Blowers Forum advocate Prashant Bhushan said the last affidavit filed by CBI in January had referred to the Enforcement Directorate ED and the Securities and Exchange Board of India SEBI finding instances of siphoning of fundsHe pointed out that the EoW had registered certain FIRs and the CBI was considering clubbing five cases flagged by the ED with the Yes Bank investigationBhushan also informed the court that former Indiabulls promoter Sameer Gehlaut had moved to London and argued that the matter warranted the constitution of a Special Investigation Team SITThe bench noted that no affidavit had been filed by the investigating agencies since January and asked the ASG what the probe agencies were doing in the caseRaju said the investigation was continuing and that the Serious Fraud Investigation Office SFIO had taken up one case while the EoW was investigating four casesPlease give me two weeks to file a comprehensive affidavit in the matter alongwith a status report the ASG said adding that it has been found that all loans extended by Sammaan Capital have been repaid in full with interestThe CJI said What has the CBI been doing from January to July We dont want to hold an investigation against innocent persons Let them have the courage to say that because money was returned no offence was made out What was EoW doing Does it not have the guts to file a status report in the case In this case the conduct of CBI and EoW was highly questionableSenior advocate Abhishek Singhvi appearing for Sammaan Capital said Gehlaut has no shareholding in the company and has nothing to do with itSenior advocates Mukul Rohatgi and Nalin Kohli appearing alongwith Singhvi also denied any wrongdoingOn December 17 last year the top court directed the CBI Director to take a final call within a week on the registration of regular cases and file a fresh compliance affidavit on the date fixedEarlier on November 19 the court had questioned the reluctance of the CBI and SEBI to probe the allegations of dubious transactions against IHFL It ordered the agency director to hold a meeting with SEBI the SFIO and the ED to look into the matterIt had also pulled up the Ministry of Corporate Affairs for the compounding of multiple offences committed by IHFL and came down heavily on SEBI over the double standards adopted by the market regulator in different cases over its jurisdiction to probe into illegalitiesThe NGO has alleged largescale irregularities in the affairs of IHFL claiming that the company and its erstwhile promoters advanced dubious loans to entities owned by large corporate groups which then allegedly routed the funds back into the accounts of companies owned by the promoters to increase their personal wealthThe NGO has challenged the February 2 2024 order of the high court refusing to order an investigation into the matterThis story has been sourced from a third party syndicated feed agencies Midday accepts no responsibility or liability for its dependability trustworthiness reliability and data of the text Midday managementmiddaycom reserves the sole right to alter delete or remove without notice the content in its absolute discretion for any reason whatsoever