LAWS(KER)-2020-8-235

SAJAN K.THOMAS Vs. STATE OF KERALA

Decided On August 04, 2020
Sajan K.Thomas Appellant
V/S
STATE OF KERALA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Appeal is filed by the petitioners challenging the interim order passed by the Learned Single Judge dated 09.03.2020, whereby the learned Single Judge has refused to grant the following interim measures sought for by the appellants.

(2.) The main prayers sought for by the appellants in the writ petition are as follows:

(3.) Learned Single Judge on hearing respective counsel appearing for the parties, has declined the interim relief, after an elaborate discussion of the facts and circumstances involved in the case and the developments that have taken place consequent to certain orders passed by the National Company Law Tribunal. The paramount contention advanced by the counsel for the appellants in this appeal is that, the learned Single Judge failed to appreciate that the interim orders passed by the National Company Law Tribunal are without jurisdiction, and without considering the said issue, the learned Single Judge has ventured into conducting a roving enquiry and went on to stay the investigation itself. It is also submitted that, the view of the learned Single Judge that, if the police investigation is permitted to continue, it might hamper the forensic audit, is against the settled principles of law with regard to investigation under the Code of Criminal Procedure and it is also trite that the investigation of a crime is to be determined by the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure unless there is specific provision in another statute which indicate a different procedure or investigation to be conducted. Therefore, according to learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellants, the said view of the learned Single Judge creates serious obstruction to the police investigation and there is no provision in the Company's Act, 2013, interdicting police investigation into cognizable offences under the Indian Penal Code with regard to the affairs of a company. Other grounds are also raised to content and canvas that the learned Single Judge was not right in not granting the interim relief sought for.