Sanjib Kumar Dey and Ors. v. Directorate of Enforcement, New Delhi and Ors.

1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

2. The present petition has been filed by 63 Petitioners from across the country against Respondent No. 1- Enforcement Directorate (ED) as also a total of 63 private Respondents which include companies and their Promoters/Directors. A tabular representation of the Private Respondents is as follows: Respondent Companies Respondent Directors/Promoters C & C Constructions Ltd. (Respondent No. 2) Amrit Pal Singh Chadha (Respondent No. 3) Sanjay Gupta (Respondent No. 4) Gurjeet Singh Johar (Respondent No. 5) Rajbir Singh (Respondent No. 6) Charanbir Singh Sethi (Respondent No. 7) C & C Towers Ltd. (Respondent No. 8) Mirador Construction Pvt. Ltd. (Respondent No. 9) Vijay Babusing Pawar (Respondent No. 10) Hemant Damodar Shah (Respondent No. 11) Mirador Dwellers Pvt. Ltd. (Respondent No. 12) Dhanashri Vijay Pawar (Respondent No. 13) Greens Farmtech Pvt. Ltd. (Respondent No. 14) Ramesh Bomme Gowda (Respondent No. 15) Ramya Ramesh Gowda (Respondent No. 16) Sai Shraddha Vivek Projects Developers Pvt. Ltd. (Respondent No. 17) Vivek Jayesh Tanna (Respondent No. 18) Jayesh Vinod Kumar Tanna (Respondent No. 19) Deep Vinod Tanna (Respondent No. 20) Vaishno Devi Dairy Products Ltd. (Respondent No. 21) Vasant Pinjan (Respondent No. 22) Nandkishor Harikishan Attal (Respondent No. 23) Mayura Nandkishore Attal (Respondent No. 24) Kasata Hometech Pvt. Ltd. (Respondent No. 25) Rameshkumar Babulal Patel (Respondent No. 26) Naresh Babubhai Patel (Respondent No. 27) Bharat High-tech Builders Pvt. Ltd. (Respondent NO. 28) Chetan Prakash Tayal (Respondent No. 29) Shivashankar Agarwal (Respondent No. 30) Ajit Sharma (Respondent No. 31) Neetu Tayal Batheja (Respondent No. 32) DDK Infratech Pvt. Ltd. (Respondent No. 33) Nimesh Uttambhai Desai (Respondent No. 34) Kushal Dasharath Sankhe (Respondent No. 35) PDM Religious and Educational Association (Respondent No. 36) Bimla Singh Prabhu (Respondent No. 37)

Joginder Singh (Respondent No. 39) Chitresh Lather (Respondent No. 40) Victor Gambir (Respondent No. 41) Ishwar Singh (Respondent No. 42) P.S. Grover (Respondent No. 43) Gopal Krishan Gupta (Respondent No. 44) Paramjit Singh (Respondent No. 45) Concept Infravisions Pvt. Ltd. (Respondent No. 46) Surinder Singh Sandha (Respondent No. 47) Arjun Singh Rawat (Respondent No. 48) Concept Horizon Infra Pvt. Ltd. (Respondent No. 49) Nishant Verma (Respondent No. 50) Jeevesh Sabharwal (Respondent No. 51) Karvy Stock Broking Limited (Respondent NO. 52) Bhagwan Das Narang (Respondent No. 53) Jyothi Prasad (Respondent No. 54) Yugandhar Meka (Respondent No. 55) Comandhur Parthasarthy (Respondent No. 56) Karvy Capital Limited (Respondent No. 57) Kovilkathu Parameswaran Jeewan (Respondent No. 58) Hitungshu Debnath (Respondent No. 59) Ajit Kumar Padikapoyil Bhaskaran (Respondent No. 60) Karvy Realty (Respondent No. 61) Pravinbhai Bhagwanji Amlani (Respondent NO. 62) Comandur Parthsarthy (Respondent No. 63) Vankata Sesha Chavali (Respondent No. 64)

3. The allegation of the Petitioners is that these Respondents, with the assistance of the Karvy Group of Companies, floated various ponzi schemes into which the Petitioners were lured to make investments. As per the petition, approximately one thousand (1000) individuals invested their hard earned money in these ponzi schemes. It has been estimated that the cumulative amount invested in these schemes totals Rs. 800 crores.

4. The case of the Petitioners is that some of the Petitioners filed criminal complaints and thereafter, FIRs have been registered against the private Respondents. Several investors had even approached the Supreme Court which vide order dated 20th April, 2022 had directed as under: “Learned counsel for the petitioner(s) prays to withdraw the present petitions to avail remedy available under Article 226 of the Constitution. Liberty granted. The Writ Petitions are dismissed as withdrawn.”

5. The Petitioners then preferred complaints before the Enforcement Directorate (ED) requesting action in accordance with law against the accused. However, till date, the Petitioners are not aware of any action taken against the private Respondents as a result of the complaint filed on 6th September, 2022.

6. Mr. Ahluwalia, ld. CGSC appearing for the ED submits that the ED has launched a money laundering investigation against M/s Karvy Stock Brocking Ltd. and various other connected entities. Significant developments have taken place in these investigations and the matter is under examination. According to the ED, the Petitioners’ complaint has already been taken on record.

7. Ld. counsel for the Petitioners submits that the private Respondents arrayed in this petition have conspired and connived with Karvy and its promoters to dupe the Petitioners. Thus, the investigation ought not to be restricted only to Karvy but to all the other private Respondents arrayed in the present petition as well.

8. Considering the nature of allegations and the stand taken by the parties, it is directed that the contents of the present writ petition along with the annexures and documents shall be transmitted to ED. Since the ED has already stated that the Petitioners’ complaint is under examination, let the allegations made in this writ petition be also considered and proper action be taken in accordance with law.

9. In view of the above discussion, no further orders are called for in this writ petition. The ED shall proceed in accordance with law. Petition is disposed of. All pending applications are also disposed of.

PRATHIBA M. SINGH JUDGE DECEMBER 9, 2022/Rahul/AM