W.P.(CRL)/3843/2018 of MUKESH MODI Vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
Parties
- E.Pass any such other writ or order(s) as it maydeem fit and proper in the interest of justice.” (PETITIONER)
- Rahul Modi and Anr. Etc” (RESPONDENT)
Cites (1)
Statutes cited (3)
- constitution of india, article-226 (1950)
- constitution of india (1950)
- companies act (2013)
Full text
solid underline = linked page · dashed underline = case is in our corpus, page not published yet · dotted red = recognized reference, not in our corpus
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+W.P.(CRL) 3843/2018MUKESH MODI..... Petitioner
..... Petitioner
ThroughMr. Aditya Singla, Advocate.versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
..... Respondents
Through
Mr. Amit Mahajan, CGSC along withMr. Anurag Ahluwalia, CGSC Mr.Kartikeya Rastogi, AdvocatewithMr. Hari Kishan, prosecutor, SFIOfor respondent Nos. 1 & 2.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDULHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRIO R R%15.04.2019
The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India hadbeen instituted on behalf of the petitioner, praying as follows:-
“A.Issue writ of mandamus or any other appropriatewrit/direction/order in the nature of writ declaring thatthe power of Respondent No. 2 to 4 to carry outinvestigation under Section 212(3) Companies Act, 2013aftertheexpiryofthetimeperiodisillegalandunconstitutional.
B.Issue writ of mandamus or any other appropriatewrit/direction/order in the nature of writ declaring thatthe investigation carried out after 19.09.2018 in File No.SFIO/INV/AOI/2018-19-AGC&L/842-966videOrderNo.07/115/2018-CL-II dated 20.06.2018 as illegal andwithout jurisdiction.W.P.(CRL) 3843/2018page 1 of 2
C.Issue writ/direction/order declaring the arrest ofthe Petitioner dated 10.12.2018 at New Delhi in the office ofRespondent No. 2 by Respondent No. 3, and proceedingsemanating therefrom being without jurisdiction and illegaland the petitioner Mukesh Modi be released forthwith.
D.Issue writ of Habeas Corpus directing immediaterelease of the Petitioner herein Sh. Mukesh Modi from theillegalarrestdated10.12.2018atNewDelhiandconsequent illegal custody from Respondent No. 2 to 4 at;
E.Pass any such other writ or order(s) as it maydeem fit and proper in the interest of justice.”
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner states that thepresent petition has been rendered infructuous, in view of the decision of theHon’ble Supreme Court of India, dated 27[th]March, 2019, in Crl. A. Nos.538-539/2019 (arising out of SLP (Crl.) Nos. 94-95 of 2019), titled as“Serious Fraud Investigation Office vs. Rahul Modi and Anr. Etc”.
The petition is accordingly disposed of as having been renderedinfructuous.
SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J
APRIL 15, 2019RS
W.P.(CRL) 3843/2018
MANOJ KUMAR OHRI, J