Delhi HC stays fresh probe against Gautam Gambhir in realty cheating case

The Delhi high court on Monday stayed a city court’s order directing fresh investigation into the alleged role of Indian cricket team coach and former member of Parliament (MP) Gautam Gambhir in a cheating case.
The case was filed by home buyers against real estate firms Rudra Buildwell Realty Pvt Ltd, H R Infracity Pvt Ltd, U M Architectures and Contractors Ltd and Gambhir, who was a director and brand ambassador of the companies’ joint venture, alleging that these three companies had jointly promoted as well as advertised an upcoming housing project by the name of “Serra Bella”, which was later renamed to “Pavo Real”.
The home buyers had booked the flats in the projects and paid various amounts in the range of 6 lakhs to 16 lakhs for various flats. They later filed a case under various sections of Indian Penal Code including cheating, criminal breach of trust saying that there was neither any infrastructural development, nor any handing over of the property to them even after 36 months of booking the flats.
“I will pass the order. In the meantime, the impugned order against the petitioner shall remain stayed. I will pass a detailed order,” justice Manoj Kumar Ohri said.
Gambhir was appealing against the session’s court October 29 order. In the said order, special judge Vishal Gogne had set aside magisterial court of discharging Gambhir along with other accused in the case and had directed the court to pass a fresh order on charge against each accused person with respect to the particular offence or provision. It had further asked the Enforcement Directorate (ED) to examine the allegations from the perspective of money laundering and file a status report.
In the 34-page order, judge Gogne had opined that the magisterial court order reflected inadequate expression of mind in deciding the allegations against Gambhir, suffered from inherent infirmity in law, being, in effect, a non speaking order.
“The impugned order reflects inadequate expression of mind in deciding the allegations against Gautam Gambhir. The allegations also merit further investigation into the role of Gautam Gambhir. The impugned order similarly failed to distinguish the available material against the other persons who were discharged,” the court maintained.
In his petition before the high court argued by senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, Gambhir argued that a further investigation would lead to his harassment. He further contended that his client had unblemished records.