$~51

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ CRL.M.C. 4240/2023 & CRL.M.A. 15879/2023
MADHURI JAIN GROVER & ANR.
Through:
versus
STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.
Through:
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI
ORDER
% 01.06.2023
CRL.M.A. No. 15878/2023 (Exemption)
Exemption granted, subject to just exceptions.
Let requisite compliances be made within 01 week.
The application stands disposed of.
..... Petitioners
Mr. Giriraj Subramanium, Mr. Sonak
Sharma, Mr. Vikash Pathak, Mr.
Simarpal Singh Sawhney, Mr.
Akhilesh Tallur, Mr. Ravi Pathak, Mr.
Rahul Singh, Mr. Nishant Shokeen
and Mr. Siddhant Jugal, Advocates.
..... Respondents
Mr. Tarang Srivastava, APP for the
State with Insp. Ramkesh, P.S.:
EOW.
Mr. Dayan Krishnan and Mr. Vikas
Pahwa, Senior Advocates with Mr. Z.
Menon, Mr. Vivek Jain, Mr. Parvez
Menon, Mr. Chirag Naik, Ms. Mrinal
Bharti, Mr. Swapnil Srivastava, Ms.
Vaijayanti Sharma, Mr. Prabhav
Radeli, Mr. Rohan Wadhwa, Mr.
Shridhar Kade and Ms. Sanjeevi
Sheshadri, Advocates for R-2.

CRL.M.C. 4240/2023 Page 1 of 5

This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 20/02/2024 at 10:02:45
 CRL.M.C. 4240/2023
By way of the present petition filed under section 482 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure 1973, the petitioners seek quashing of
case FIR No. 36/2023 dated 10.05.2023 registered under sections
406/408/409/420/467/468/471 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code,
1860 at P.S. Economic Offences Wing, New Delhi.
2. Petitioners Nos. 1 and 2, who are wife and husband, are stated to be
the promoters and directors of respondent No. 2 company, which runs
the UPI platform called ‘BharatPe’.
3. Respondent No. 2 company is the complainant in the matter.
4. Mr. Giriraj Subramanium, learned counsel appearing for the
petitioners submits that a perusal of the FIR will show that essentially
the allegations are about certain transactions relating to input tax
credit and payment of penalty under the GST regime and other
matters pertaining to the management and affairs of the company,
which the petitioners contend, they were entitled to conduct in their
capacity as Directors of the company and for which they had requisite
authority from the Board of Directors.
5. Counsel further submits, that the petitioners, being the promoters and
directors, were in fact involved in nurturing the company from a small
venture with a paid-up capital of less than Rs. 1 lac at the inception to
a valuation of Rs. 20,000/- crores in 2023.
6. Counsel has taken the court through the allegations contained in the
FIR to contend that the allegations do not disclose any criminality.
7. More specifically, attention is drawn to the Annual Report of
respondent No. 2 company for the year 2021–22, to submit that the

CRL.M.C. 4240/2023 Page 2 of 5

This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 20/02/2024 at 10:02:45
 accounts of the company were adopted by the Board of Directors,
with a specific noting that despite certain observations of the statutory
auditors and their opinion regarding deficiencies with respect to the
financial controls and reporting, the financial statements of the
company as of 31.03.2022 reflected the true and fair financial position
of the company. Furthermore, it is contended that the Annual Report
also records that no instances of fraud were reported by the statutory
auditors of the company to its Board of Directors.
8. Counsel accordingly submits, that the complaint based on which the
FIR has come to be registered is informed only by mala-fides and
there is no reason why investigation should be permitted to go-on.
9. Upon a prima-facie view of the matter, issue notice.
10. Mr. Tarang Srivastava, learned APP appears on behalf of the State on
advance copy; accepts notice; and seeks time to file status report.
11. Learned counsel appears on behalf of respondent No. 2 on advance
copy; and opposes issuance of notice.
12. Learned senior counsel appearing for respondent No. 2 submit that the
matter concerns complex financial transactions, which respondent
No.2 company found were fraudulently undertaken by the petitioners,
and which amounted to defalcation of company funds.
13. It is pointed-out, that the essence of the allegation in the complaint is
that the petitioners availed input tax credits under the GST law in
relation to bogus transactions, with vendors which did not exist; and
also committed other acts of siphoning-off monies and forgery of
documents in relation to the company, to the benefit of petitioner No.
1’s relatives. In particular, attention is drawn to a subsequent report of

CRL.M.C. 4240/2023 Page 3 of 5

This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 20/02/2024 at 10:02:45
 the company and to the notes forming part of the standalone financial
statements relating to ‘governance review’. It is submitted, that the
contents of this report reflect the allegations that are part of the
complaint against the petitioners, and also of a civil suit subsequently
filed by the company, relating to misappropriation and siphoning-off
monies by the petitioners.
14. Let status report/reply be filed within 06 weeks; response/rejoinder
thereto, if any, be filed within 04 weeks thereafter; with copies to the
opposing counsel.
CRL.M.A. No. 15877/2023 (Stay)
15. Issue notice.
16. Mr. Tarang Srivastava, learned APP appears on behalf of the State on
advance copy; accepts notice; and seeks time to file status report.
17. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No. 2 on advance
copy, accepts notice; and seeks time to file reply.
18. Let status report/reply be filed within 06 weeks; response/rejoinder
thereto, if any, be filed within 04 weeks thereafter; with copies to the
opposing counsel.
19. Learned counsel for the petitioners seeks stay of investigation. In the
alternate, he seeks a direction that the Investigating Officer would
give to the petitioners advance written notice in the event he needs
their custodial interrogation.
20. However, this court is of the view that no case is made-out, at least at
this stage, for staying investigation in the matter. Insofar as the prayer
for advance written notice of arrest is concerned, the petitioners are at

CRL.M.C. 4240/2023 Page 4 of 5

This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 20/02/2024 at 10:02:45
 liberty to adopt other remedies as available to them in the criminal
procedure code, in accordance with law.
21. Re-notify on 25th September 2023.

ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI, J

JUNE 1, 2023/uj

CRL.M.C. 4240/2023 Page 5 of 5

This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 20/02/2024 at 10:02:45