The petitioner is requesting a full investigation by the CBI and the Enforcement Directorate (ED) into the alleged financial misdeeds of the SREI Group.
New Delhi: Today, 19th March, The Supreme Court has asked the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to present its stance on a plea demanding a thorough investigation into alleged financial fraud by Kolkata-based SREI Group. The plea claims that the company engaged in fund mismanagement, including round-tripping money through a private trust and misusing public funds taken from various banks.
ALSO READ: Kerala CM Urges Comprehensive Cybersecurity Framework to Combat Online Financial Fraud
A bench consisting of Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar took note of submissions by advocate Prashant Bhushan, who appeared on behalf of the petitioner, Bhupendra Nath from Lucknow.
The petitioner is requesting a full investigation by the CBI and the Enforcement Directorate (ED) into the alleged financial misdeeds of the SREI Group.
According to the plea, the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) had removed the boards of certain SREI Group firms in 2021 due to governance failures and loan defaults. The management of these firms was subsequently transferred to the National Asset Reconstruction Company Limited (NARCL). The petitioner claims that the SREI Group was involved in financial misconduct on a large scale.
The case was initially investigated by the Economic Offences Wing (EOW) in Varanasi. However, the Allahabad High Court had dismissed the investigation on March 18, 2024, based on the EOW’s report. The current plea before the Supreme Court challenges this decision.
Supreme Court’s Observations
The court recorded the statement of Additional Solicitor General S V Raju, who appeared for the ED and stated that he would also represent the CBI. He assured the court that he would seek instructions from the central probe agency on the matter.
Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna remarked, “It is for them to take a decision as per law,” in response to Bhushan’s argument that a case involving massive banking and financial fraud should be investigated by the CBI.
Advocate Prashant Bhushan pointed out that the alleged fraud amounts to thousands of crores of rupees. He referred to the Reserve Bank of India’s guidelines, stating that any financial fraud exceeding Rs.500 crore should be reported to the CBI for investigation.
“Despite the directive and clear evidence of fraudulent activities, no serious action was taken by investigating agencies,” he claimed.
Some lawyers representing the opposing parties raised doubts about the identity of the petitioner, questioning whether he actually existed or if the case was fabricated. The Supreme Court, acknowledging these concerns, directed that the petitioner must appear before the apex court registrar via video conferencing before the next hearing.
ALSO READ: Mumbai Court: Nirav Modi’s London Property Sale Proceeds to Indian Government
Bhushan assured the court that the petitioner had already visited the Supreme Court to fulfill procedural formalities for filing the case.
The court scheduled the next hearing for the week of May 5.
The plea also highlights another alleged misconduct involving SREI Infrastructure Finance Limited and M/S Sahaj e-Village. The Uttar Pradesh government had authorized these firms to operate Jan Suvidha Kendras in various districts. These centers, also known as Common Service Centers (CSCs), provide digital services such as Aadhaar enrollment, banking, and bill payments to facilitate e-governance.
However, the petitioner alleged that in Jaunpur district, these firms demanded and collected illegal amounts ranging from Rs.7,000 to Rs. 25,000 from individuals wanting to set up these centers. The petitioner, who also paid Rs. 7,000 to these companies, is seeking a probe against them.
The plea names several parties, including the CBI, ED, the state of Uttar Pradesh, the Director General of Police (DGP) of Uttar Pradesh, and the Superintendent of Police (SP) of Jaunpur. The petitioner urges these authorities to take action against the alleged financial fraud.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
