The Delhi Supreme Court has dismissed a plea for subpoena from Bollywood actor Vivek Oberoi, his father Suresh Oberoi and their Delhi-based company Yashi Multimedia Pvt Ltd for allegedly defrauding an entertainment company in 2003.
Judge Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav said he did not allow the injunction not only because the petitioner had resorted to civil remedies, but also because the court ruled that access to the entire complaint at face value would not constitute a commission for the offense of cheating under the Indian Penal Code. Code (IPC).
“Even not disclosing the commission of an offense on the basis of the entire complaint would be one of the grounds for quashing the complaint under the Supreme Court’s decision…,” the Supreme Court said in an order issued on 1 was adopted in November. .
The petitioner Deepak Mehta, CEO of Mehta Entertainment in Mumbai, initially approached a magistrate in Delhi with a criminal complaint against the Oberoi family and their company, requesting a subpoena against them.
The complaint was rejected. The dismissal was challenged in a criminal court and then in the High Court.
The Supreme Court rejected the request, saying: “This court finds no reason to interfere with the injunction issued by the courts below in the exercise of its powers under Article 482 of the CrPC (Code of Criminal Procedure).” “Therefore, the immediate petition is rejected,” it said.
According to the complaint, the petitioner ran an event management company and organized shows of celebrities/cinema stars and movie actors in various parts of the United States of America.
According to the plea, the complainant was introduced to the Oberois in January 2003 and Suresh Oberoi asked him to organize some shows for his son Vivek in the US and Canada in August and September of that year.
He claimed that the deal to host the shows had been finalized and that Vivek’s consent had been obtained and it was agreed that the shows would be hosted in August or September 2003, for which the actor would be paid $300,000.
“The complainant further stated that he transferred the aforementioned amount to the bank account of defendant No. 1 (Yashi Entertainment). The complainant organized the shows but Defendant No. 5 (Vivek Oberoi) did not show up,” according to the plea.
It said attempts were made to resolve the issue but failed and the complainant’s money was not returned.
(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NewsMadura staff and has been published from a syndicated feed.)
Featured video of the day
130-year-old tunnel discovered in Mumbai hospital