SHRIKANT MOHTA Vs. REPUBLIC OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Instant petition under Sec. 482 Cr.P.C. is at the behest of the petitioner challenging the legality and judicial propriety of the impugned order dtd. 19/10/2022 under Annexure-8 passed in T.R. No.4 of 2017 by the learned Special Judge (CBI-I), Bhubaneswar corresponding to R.C. Case No.39/S/2014 whereby an application dtd. 15/9/2022 for release of passport to enable him to travel abroad for the reason stated was declined.

(2.) Heard Mr. Kanungo, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Nayak, learned Special Counsel for CBI.

(3.) Mr. Kanungo, learned Senior Advocate submits that the petitioner is the Managing Director of SVF Entertainment Private Limited (in short 'SVF') which is a company registered under the Companies Act and engaged in the business of film production, distribution etc. through various modes and formats and in course of its business, by an agreement dtd. 7/4/2010 (Annexure-1), the SVF assigned the sole and exclusive satellite television broadcasting rights of 70 feature films to Brand Value Communications Limited (shortly as 'BVC') to be broadcast through its channel 'Rupashi Bangla' for a period of three years and thereafter, entered into another agreement dtd. 23/5/2010 (Annexure-2) for a daily television programme 'Suhasini' to air it through the channel at an agreed rate per episode. It is submitted by Mr. Kanungo that SVF and BVC had a dispute with the assigned agreement under Annexure-1 and in that respect, an FIR was lodged against the petitioner and others which was challenged before the Calcutta High Court and the chargesheet was accordingly quashed by order dtd. 15/1/2014 (Annexure-3) and the same was challenged by BVC before the Apex Court by an SLP but it was dismissed by order dtd. 30/11/2015 (Annexure-4) and in the meantime, BVC filed C.P. No.361 of 2012 before the Calcutta High Court for winding up of the SVF which was dismissed and ultimately by virtue of an arbitration clause in the agreement under Annexure-1, the dispute was referred to the Arbitration Tribunal which passed the award on 13/6/2018 and the same has been challenged under Sec. 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act by the petitioner. As against the aforesaid background, the petitioner was summoned by the CBI in connection with the present case and completely in disregard to the fact that there is independent transaction and disputes between the parties, he was arrested and finally chargesheeted on 22/5/2020 under Ss. 420, 408, 409 and 120-B IPC and Ss. 4, 5, 6 of the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act which on a bare perusal and scrutiny, no clinching evidence or material could be found against him. Against the chargesheet filed, Mr. Kanungo, learned Senior Advocate lastly submits that the criminal proceeding is under challenge in CRLMC No.3407 of 2019.