Delhi High Court
Jayant Nanda vs Union Of India, Through ... on 11 March, 2022
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of decision: March 11, 2022
+ W.P.(C) 4081/2021, CM No. 10777/2022
JAYANT NANDA ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. R.K. Handoo, Mr. Yoginder
Handoo and Mr. Ashwin Kataria,
Advs.
versus
UNION OF INDIA, THROUGH: SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF
FINANCE, GOI & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Devesh Dubey, Adv. for
Mr. Anil Soni, CGSC for R-1/UOI
Ms.Vibhooti Malhotra, Sr. SC with
Mr. Shailendra Singh and Mr. Udit
Sharma, Advs. for R-2
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO
V. KAMESWAR RAO, J. (ORAL)
CM No. 10777/2022 (by petitioner)
1. This is an application filed by the petitioner with the
following prayers:
"In view of the submissions made hereinabove, it is most
respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased
to:
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:ANIL
KUMAR YADAV W.P.(C) 4081-2021 Page 1
Signing Date:11.03.2022
16:36:54
a) Allow the present application and permit the Petitioner
to travel to UAE and Thailand from March - April, 2022
and/or;
b) Pass any other order(s) as this Hon'ble Court deems fit
and proper and in the interest of justice and equity."
2. The submission of Mr. R.K. Handoo, learned counsel for
the petitioner is that the petitioner intends to travel to UAE from
New Delhi on March 04, 2022; from UAE to Thailand on March
14, 2022 staying in Thailand till March 27/28, 2022 when he shall
again fly to UAE and return back to New Delhi on April 06, 2022.
3. It is his submission that the petitioner intends to travel to
UAE as he is a Non-Resident since 1989 and his place of residence
is Dubai from where he carries his business, which is spread over
various countries and his presence is required for taking various
business decisions. He is travelling to Thailand to restart the
construction of a hotel / resort on the land owned by his company
at a place called Koh Samui, Thailand, which construction was
halted due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The submission of
Mr. Handoo is that the statement of the petitioner has been
recorded by the Income Tax Department. He has submitted all the
documents as sought from him. Further, no summons are standing
as of today against the petitioner. He stated that on earlier
occasions also this Court has granted permission to the petitioner
to travel to UAE and also to UK subject to conditions imposed
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:ANIL
KUMAR YADAV W.P.(C) 4081-2021 Page 2
Signing Date:11.03.2022
16:36:54
which the petitioner has scrupulously followed and has always
returned back to India.
4. That apart, his wife and daughter are residents of this
country and as such he shall return back to India. He contested the
submission advanced by the counsel for the respondent No.2 that
the petitioner is not submitting the required documents to the
Income Tax Authority by stating, that no summons in that regard
have been issued. He stated, the security / surety provided to the
Registrar General of this Court, pursuant to earlier order(s)
continues to be with the Registry of this Court. He prays that as
the matter is listed on April 08, 2022 for hearing, the petitioner
shall return back to India on or before April 06, 2022.
5. On the other hand, Ms.Vibhooti Malhotra, learned Senior
Standing Counsel appearing for the Income Tax Department would
contest the application, by stating that the request of the petitioner
to travel to UAE and Thailand does not deserve any consideration,
inasmuch as the petitioner is under investigation for commission of
offences punishable under the Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign
Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015 ('Black
Money Act' hereinafter). The investigations conducted so far
indicate that huge unaccounted income was parked outside India
and the same was brought back to Indian companies in the name of
either the petitioner or entities owned by the petitioner. The
investigation conducted also revealed that the petitioner made huge
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:ANIL
KUMAR YADAV W.P.(C) 4081-2021 Page 3
Signing Date:11.03.2022
16:36:54
investments outside India in companies owned / controlled by
Dr. Jyostna Suri (petitioner's sister) and family.
6. She also stated that the petitioner may not have actual
business outside India and that he is maintaining residence outside
India only to maintain his non-resident status in order to avoid tax
implications and mandatory reporting of foreign financial assets to
the Indian revenue authorities. That apart, she highlighted the fact
that the petitioner has not fully cooperated with the investigations
being conducted by the respondent No.2. In this regard, she has
drawn my attention to the summons dated February 22, 2021
issued upon the petitioner by the answering respondent under the
provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961. That apart, the petitioner
is yet to furnish the complete particulars of the requisitions made in
the said summons. Though, she does concede during the
submissions that no summons are standing against the petitioner as
of today. She qualifies the submission by stating that the
respondent Authority intends to issue summons to the petitioner for
his appearance. It is only pursuant to the order dated May 04, 2021,
the statement of the petitioner could be recorded under special
COVID-19 protocols on May 17, 2021 at his residence. However,
despite repeated assurances, the petitioner has not provided the
requisitioned information. Information regarding account of
summons, replies of references made to financial institutions in
UAE, UK and other foreign jurisdiction under exchange of
information treaties are still awaited.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:ANIL
KUMAR YADAV W.P.(C) 4081-2021 Page 4
Signing Date:11.03.2022
16:36:54
7. She submitted in view of the pending information under
summons and reference under the exchange of information treaties,
the petitioner's presence is likely to be required in investigation
pending under the Black Money Act in the coming future and the
investigation conducted against Dr. Jyotsna Suri (the petitioner's
sister) has culminated in a criminal complaint filed by the
answering respondent under the aforesaid Act and the same is
registered as Ct. Case No.1492/2021 pending consideration before
the Court of Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Tis Hazari
Courts, New Delhi, and at this critical juncture, the petitioner
should not be allowed to travel outside country. She seeks the
dismissal of the application.
8. Mr. Devesh Dubey, Advocate appearing for Mr.Anil Soni
state that respondent Nos.1, 3 and 4 are only implementing
agencies and have no submissions to put forth in this regard.
9. In rejoinder submissions, Mr. Handoo would submit that
the stand which has been taken by the respondents is similar to the
one which has been taken at earlier occasions as well, when this
Court had permitted the petitioner to travel to UAE and UK, that
too after the statement of the petitioner was recorded on May 17,
2021 in terms of the order passed by this Court. He reiterated that
thereafter no summons have been issued for the presence of the
petitioner. Hence, it is a fit case where the prayers as made in the
application need to be granted.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:ANIL
KUMAR YADAV W.P.(C) 4081-2021 Page 5
Signing Date:11.03.2022
16:36:54
10. Having considered the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the parties, it is noted from the record that the
investigation is pending against the petitioner since 2020 and a
complaint has been filed against the main accused. The summons
were issued to the petitioner on February 22, 2021. It is stated by
Ms. Malhotra that the petitioner is yet to furnish complete
particulars of the requisition as made for in the summons. She does
concede that the statement of the petitioner was recorded on May
17, 2021 pursuant to the orders of this Court. She also conceded
that no summons are pending against the petitioner as of today.
She also stated that the department intends to issue summons in
future but no specific date has been given by her.
11. There is no dispute that this Court vide order dated May
24, 2021 had permitted the petitioner to travel to UAE for two
months subject to fulfilling the following conditions:
i. The petitioner shall furnish security by way of an
unencumbered property of a value of ₹10 crores or above,
or a fixed deposit of the same value before the Registrar
General of this Court.
ii. The petitioner shall furnish liquid security for a sum
of ₹1 crore, either in the form of a Bank Guarantee or in the
form of a Fixed Deposit or in any other liquid form before
the Registrar General of this Court.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:ANIL
KUMAR YADAV W.P.(C) 4081-2021 Page 6
Signing Date:11.03.2022
16:36:54
iii. The petitioner's sister Dr. Jyotsna Suri shall also
stand as a surety and shall execute a surety bond for the
petitioner guaranteeing his return to the country within a
period of two months from the date of his travel before the
Registrar General of this Court.
iv. The petitioner shall also submit an undertaking
before the Court that he shall return to this country within
two months from the date of his departure.
v. The petitioner shall furnish a full itinerary of his stay
at the UAE, including the places he would be staying in
UAE/overseas and a functional phone number for all such
places.
12. I note from the order dated September 06, 2021 the
petitioner was able to travel to UAE on August 28, 2021 and
returned to India on September 05, 2021. Further vide order dated
September 27, 2021, the petitioner was permitted to travel to UAE
and UK for three months subject to the following conditions:-
i. Since the petitioner has already complied with the
direction nos.1, 2 and 3 of the order dated 24.05.2021, he
will file an affidavit before this Court, undertaking to return
to the country within three months from the date of his
departure.
ii. The petitioner shall also undertake not to operate his
bank accounts in UK during his visit.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:ANIL
KUMAR YADAV W.P.(C) 4081-2021 Page 7
Signing Date:11.03.2022
16:36:54
iii. The petitioner will also furnish the full itinerary of his
stay at UAE and UK, along with his phone numbers, in both
UAE and UK, which numbers will be kept operational at all
times.
iv. The affidavit incorporating the aforesaid be filed before
this Court, at least one week prior to the date of his departure
from the country.
13. The paragraph 8 of the order also reads as under:-
"8. Needless to state, upon the petitioner returning to
India after the aforesaid period of three months, the
surety furnished by the petitioner, in terms of order
dated 24.05.2021, would be duly returned to him or
the surety, as the case may be."
14. Learned counsel for the respondents have not stated that
the petitioner has misused the permission granted by this Court to
the petitioner to visit UAE and UK. If that be so, this Court is
inclined to allow the present application and permit the petitioner
to travel to UAE and Thailand, with a further direction that he shall
return to India on or before April 06, 2022, subject to the following
conditions:
i. The petitioner shall furnish a security by way of an
unencumbered property of a value of ₹10 Crores or more,
or a fixed deposit of the same value before the Registrar
General of this Court. If the property furnished as a
security in terms of the order dated May 24, 2021 has not
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:ANIL
KUMAR YADAV W.P.(C) 4081-2021 Page 8
Signing Date:11.03.2022
16:36:54
been released to the petitioner or to the person, who
furnished the same, the said property shall be accepted as a
security, provided a fresh valuation report is called for, to
ensure the property is valued at ₹10 Crores or more.
ii. The petitioner shall also furnish a liquid security for
a sum of ₹1 Crore, either in the form of a Bank Guarantee
or in the form of a Fixed Deposit or in any other liquid
form before the Registrar General of this Court. If the
liquid security for a sum of ₹1 Crore has been provided by
the petitioner in terms of the order dated May 24, 2021 has
not been returned / refunded, the same shall be accepted,
provided the same is in order.
iii. The petitioner shall also submit before this Court an
undertaking that he shall return to the country on or before
April 06, 2022.
iv. The petitioner's sister Dr. Jyotsna Suri shall also
stand as a surety and shall execute a surety bond for the
petitioner guaranteeing his return to the country on or
before April 06, 2022, before the Registrar General of this
Court.
v. The petitioner shall furnish a full itinerary of his stay
at UAE and Thailand, including the places where he would
be staying in at UAE and Thailand along with a functional
phone number for all such places including his personal
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:ANIL
KUMAR YADAV W.P.(C) 4081-2021 Page 9
Signing Date:11.03.2022
16:36:54
mobile number which he shall keep operational and
functional at all times.
vi. Till the petitioner returns to the country on or before
April 06, 2022, the wife of the petitioner shall not leave the
country.
15. The Deputy Director (Investigation) shall duly inform the
Immigration Bureau once the aforesaid conditions are met.
Needless to say, upon the petitioner returning to India, in terms of
the above order, the surety furnished by the petitioner would be
duly returned to him or the surety provider as the case may be.
16. This order has been passed in the facts of this case. The
application is disposed of.
17. The parties / counsels to appear before the Registrar
General on March 14, 2022 at 12:00 noon, for further proceedings.
V. KAMESWAR RAO, J
MARCH 11, 2022/aky
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:ANIL
KUMAR YADAV W.P.(C) 4081-2021 Page 10
Signing Date:11.03.2022
16:36:54
