“Karnataka High Court Puts Brakes on SFIO: Demands Docs, Halts Arrests in Veena’s Plea”

In a recent development, the Karnataka High Court has adjourned the plea filed by Exalogic Solutions company director T. Veena Vijayan, seeking an interim stay on the Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO) probe into transactions related to the coal sand company CMRL. The court has also directed Exalogic to produce all necessary documents requested by the SFIO during its investigation.

During the hearing, detailed arguments were presented, and while the court did not clarify when it would announce its verdict, it verbally instructed the Additional Solicitor General representing SFIO that no drastic actions, including arrests, should be taken until the judgment is delivered. The SFIO assured the court that it would comply with this directive.

The investigation revolves around the alleged illegal receipt of money by Exalogic Solutions Company from the Crimean company CMRL. Veena Vijayan’s plea had made SFIO and the Union Ministry of Corporate Affairs the opposite parties. The SFIO had summoned Veena, requesting various documents as part of its investigation into financial transactions between CMRL and Exalogic.

In response to the court’s directive, Exalogic Solutions has been asked to provide all documents necessary for the SFIO investigation. Meanwhile, Veena Vijayan is instructed to respond to the SFIO notice. The court did not accept Veena’s request to cancel the investigation but emphasized that, although measures such as arrest were prohibited, the investigation could proceed without hindrance.

Exalogic Solutions, represented in court, claimed that the SFIO probe would not stand and mentioned that the Registrar of Companies is continuing its investigation. However, when asked about the progress of the Registrar of Companies investigation, the lawyer for Exalogic stated that he was unaware of its current status.

The court’s decision to adjourn the plea and prevent drastic actions until the judgment adds a layer of complexity to the ongoing legal proceedings, with both sides presenting their arguments as the investigation unfolds.