IC: HEERA GROUP’S FAILED PROMISES AND THE PROPOSAL TO SETTLE IN SUPREME COURT

Out of the 26 FIRs and more registered against the company, in none of them has the company managed to establish existence of business or source of funds using which the company can (or intends to) pay back its depositors. Any kind of proposal by the company to settle the complainants may be deemed satisfactory only if supported by ‘verified source of funds’ that the company must submit as well as ‘depositing of promised money’ for settlement in all other courts (Hyderabad High Court, Malegaon Sessions Court, Bombay High Court) as security for complainants before granting bail.

Image #1

It is evident that Nowhera Shaikh’s sole intention behind promises to settlements in various courts of India is only to procure bail by misguiding the courts. There are extremely high chances that Nowhera Shaikh may abscond like the other numerous accused in the case (only three out of thirty three arrested) and this may only delay the case further, thereby amounting to more injustice to the victims who are in desperate anticipation of recovery.

LIST OF EVENTS:
#1 - Nampally Criminal Court: The court had ordered a deposit of Rs. Five Crores but the company has failed to deposit.
#2 - Hyderabad High Court: Justice Sri Devi had ordered a deposit of Rs. Five Crores within two months and settlement of all claimants/informants in Telangana within a period of three months in the bail order, yet to be realized.
#3 - Malegaon Sessions Court: The additional sessions judge had ordered Nowhera Shaikh to deposit Rs. 1,10,00,000/- (one crore ten lakh rupees) within three weeks from the date of order as a precedent condition for granting bail.
#4 - Bombay High Court: Nowhera Shaikh agreed and the court ordered disbursement of monies lying in the seized bank accounts in exchange for bail. The court had also directed the assigned Competent Authority to take adequate steps to secure the disbursement of the amounts lying with the bank accounts of the company.
#5 – Letter to Competent Authority (Maharashtra): On followup to the Bombay High Court order of disbursement of monies lying in the seized bank accounts of the company, the company had communicated with the assigned competent authority, requesting addition of individual FIRs (FIRs not registered under Depositor’s Act) to the disbursement procedure.
#6 - Registrar of Companies Case: In the case of Registrar of Companies vs Nowhera Shaikh and others, on Defense Evidence, Nowhera Shaikh had stated that all her documents were seized by Ram Kumar, ACP, PS, CCS, Hyderabad, thereby establishing lack of data availability with company.

In summary, Nowhera Shaikh’s proposal to settle the investors cannot be taken seriously because two major reasons out of many, backed by the above list of events; firstly, the company failed to uphold their promises of paying/settling complainants of various cases registered against it; and secondly, the company claims to not have any data related to the investors, and so it is not clear to the investors as to how any kind of ‘proposal to settle’ the investors could be realized.

Y. Sayed
For All India Heera Victims Association

LIST OF DOCUMENTS/COURT ORDERS SUPPORTING THE ABOVE
1. Nampally Court Order – MSJ Courts, Hyderabad, Criminal Bail Application No. 3229 of 2018 (CNR No. TSHM000072442018).
2. Hyderabad High Court – Writ Petition No. 5449 and 7950 of 2019, Common Order.
3. Malegaon Sessions Court – Criminal Bail Application No. 585 of 2019 in C.R. No. 183/2019.
4. Bombay High Court - Criminal Bail Application No. 2008 of 2019.
5. Letter From Heera Group to Competent Authority (Maharashtra), dated January 22, 2020.
6. Registrar of Companies vs Nowhera Shaikh & Others (CNR No. TSHM000035902019).

Link to Documents 1 to 6: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1qJuIxz5rFbYugDfWeIkWuFeEDc1LP6Iz?usp=sharing