M/S. JERMYN CAPITAL LLC DUBAI v. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & ORS.
Case Details & Bench
- Court
- High Court
- Hon'ble Judges
- Krishna Murari
- Sanjay Kumar
- Judgment Date
- 2023-05-17
- Court Decision / Holding
- IA 100413/2023 allowed; MA 1278/2023 disposed of. The Court substituted para 21 of the 09.05.2023 order to permit the appellant to unconditionally withdraw the aforesaid amount along with the fixed deposit interest accrued thereon.
- Final Disposition
- IA allowed; MA disposed of
Parties to the Case
Appellants / Petitioners
- M/S. JERMYN CAPITAL LLC DUBAI
Respondents
- Central Bureau of Investigation & ors.
Legal Representation & Advocates
Counsels for Petitioners
- • Mukul Rohatgi, Sr. Adv.
- • Sunil Fernandes
- • Ms. Nupur Kumar
- • Divyansh Tiwari
- • M. Thangathurai
- • Ms. Priyansha Sharma
- • Ms. Diksha G Dadu
Counsels for Respondents
- • K M Nataraj, ASG
- • Rajesh Ranjan
- • Mukul Singh
- • Shailesh Madiyal
- • Pratyush Shrivastav
- • Arvind Kumar Sharma
- • Ms. Swati Ghildiyal
- • Ms. Devyani Bhatt
- • M/s. K J John and Co., Advs.
Case Synopsis & Summary
This miscellaneous application arises from a May 9, 2023 order in Criminal Appeal No. 1434 of 2023, concerning the release of Rs. 38.52 crore deposited as sale proceeds. M/S JerMyN Capital LLC Dubai sought modification of the court’s order that required furnishing a bank guarantee for release of the amount, urging that the funds be withdrawn unconditionally along with 4 percent simple interest. The appellant relied on prior directions by the Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT) and subsequent orders passed by this Court directing that the sale proceeds aggregating Rs. 38.52 crore be kept in bank fixed deposits to secure a higher rate of interest. The appellant furnished copies of the SAT order dated 08.05.2006 and the Court’s orders dated 05.12.2008, 14.05.2009 and 16.11.2009 to demonstrate the historical pattern of preserving value through investment. In light of these materials, the Court modified para 21 of the May 9, 2023 order by substituting it to authorize unconditional withdrawal of the amount together with accrued fixed deposit interest. The IA was allowed, MA 1278/2023 disposed of, and the appellant permitted to withdraw the amount unconditionally with interest, without the requirement of a bank guarantee or fixed deposit constraints, in line with prior practice.”
Submissions & Arguments
Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners
The appellant submitted that the sale proceeds (Rs. 38.52 crore) had been directed to fixed deposits following prior SAT and Supreme Court orders to secure a higher interest, and that the Court should modify the May 9, 2023 order para 21 to permit unconditional withdrawal of the amount along with accrued fixed deposit interest; they provided copies of SAT order dated 08.05.2006 and Court orders dated 05.12.2008, 14.05.2009 and 16.11.2009 to support the relief sought.
Contentions of Respondents
Not stated in the provided text.
Diagnostic Tool
Does this judgment govern your specific facts?
Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against M/S. JERMYN CAPITAL LLC DUBAI v. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & ORS. and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.
Extracted Judgment Text
Exact text extracted from official judgment records.