|
A Delhi court recently issued a Non-Bailable Warrant (NBW) against the Managing Director (MD) of Nellore International Airport Limited (NIAL) over non-appearance in a three crore cheque bounce case.
Metropolitan magistrate Shikha Chahal issued the NBW against Vankayalapati Umesh on October 9. "There is no cogent reason for the non-appearance of the accused today and he had sought adjournment on the last date of the hearing for furnishing bail bonds and to engage a lawyer," the court observed. The court further noted that in view of the fact that the accused is well aware of the proceedings of the present matter and is deliberately evading the process of law by his non-appearance. "It appears from the conduct of the accused that his non-appearance is intentional," the court said in the order. The court ordered, "Issue NBWs against the accused through SHO concerned on the filing of PFwithin 14 days, returnable on next date of hearing. Steps be taken within 14 days." The court has listed the matter for the appearance of the accused/furnishing of bail bonds/framing of notice on November 22, 2023. The court said that the matter is at the stage of furnishing of bail bonds/verification of settlement. As the parties have not entered into a settlement, the matter is proceeding on merits, the court noted. Advocate Utkarsh Singh, counsel for complainant Company ANS Construction Pvt. Ltd., drew the attention of the court that the accused has not appeared. The complainant had alleged that the NIAL based in Hyderabad offered a Rs 100 Crore contract to the complainant company based in Delhi. In lieu of the contract, Rs 3 crore were taken as Earnest Money Deposit (EMD). However, neither the contract was awarded to the company nor the EMD was returned. Later, multiple cheques to the tune of Rs 3 crore were given to return the amount, the Company alleged. It is further alleged that the cheque, which was given to return the money given in lieu of EMD bounced. The counsel for the complainant Advocate Utkarsh Singh, submitted that despite taking time to settle the dispute neither the accused approached for settlement nor did he appear before the court. In fact, time was sought to furnish bail bonds and engage a lawyer but none appeared, the counsel added. (ANI)
|
