2020-06-28 15:26:00

NEW DELHI: Former Chairman of Wipro, Azim Hasham Premji, and his wife, have moved the Supreme court for quashing of summons orders issued against them by a Bengaluru trial court in case alleging breach of trust and corruption arising out of the merger of three firms with an Azim Premji group company.

A non-governmental organization (NGO) has filed the complaint in the trial court against the merger of three companies with Hasham Investment and Trading Company, a firm owned by Premji group. The complaint alleges illegality in the transfer of assets worth Rs45,000 from three companies into a private trust and Hasham Investment and Trading Company, a newly formed company.

Summons were issued in January by a special judge at the city civil court in Bengaluru against Azim Premji and his wife in a case filed under Indian Penal Code alleging criminal breach of trust, conspiracy and under provisions of Corruption Act, 1988.

The plea before the apex court also challenges the Karnataka high court order that refused to quash the trial court summon orders.

The NGO has alleged that the three companies belong to the government and hence could not have been merged.

The plea filed by Premji and his wife in the Apex court submit that trial court issued summons orders without conducting any preliminary inquiry into the case. The petitioners contend that similar cases were filed before Delhi High court and National Company Law Appellate Tribunal but the same were dismissed and cost was also imposed against the complainants for frivolous allegations.

The petitioners have called the claims “mischievous” and argued that the amalgamation scheme sanctioned by the Karnataka high court in a previous order has been deliberately suppressed by the NGO during the case proceedings before the trial court and the high court.

The petitioners have submitted in the petition that by suppressing the amalgamation scheme while filing the complaint, “the NGO sough to interpret the objectives of the schemes as being criminal in nature. The complainant misled the court to take cognizance.”

Subscribe to newsletters

* Enter a valid email

* Thank you for subscribing to our newsletter.

Read more

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

ABOUT

Get post 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

CONTACT US

Bangalore, India
[email protected]

Scroll to Top