Supreme Court Questions UP Police For Not Arresting Satinder Singh Bhasin Despite His Non-Surrender After Bail Cancellation

While passing an order for immediate surrender by businessman Satinder Singh Bhasin, the Supreme Court today questioned the Uttar Pradesh police authorities over their failure to arrest him when he failed to surrender after cancellation of bail.Statedly, the Court expressed that the police seemed to be colluding with Bhasin. Considering the authorities' request for time to make the arrest, the matter was however posted to Monday.During the hearing, the Court drew the authorities' attention to Article 144 of the Constitution, which requires every authority in India to act in aid of the Supreme Court.The Court directed authorities to take all necessary steps to secure Bhasin's presence, including notifying airports across the country.The Court also directed the Director General of Police (DGP) of Uttar Pradesh to personally ensure compliance with its earlier order requiring Bhasin to surrender.A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and N Kotiswar Singh was dealing with a miscellaneous application filed in a writ petition by Bhasin, whose bail was recently cancelled by the Court over his failure to settle complainants' claims in connection with the 'Grand Venice' project.The Court, in the forenoon session, directed the DGP to be virtually present at 3 PM. Afternoon, the Commissioner of Police, Gautam Buddh Nagar, Uttar Pradesh appeared through video conferencing mode, as the DGP was involved in some other urgent affair.The Court issued the following directions :(I) The DGP, State of Uttar Pradesh shall ensure compliance of the order. Needless to add, he is otherwise mandated in law under the provision of Article 144 of the Constitution of India. (II) All such steps, as may be necessary, including the issuance of look out notice shall be taken and all Airports in the country shall be notified of such steps. (III) Non-applicant/original petitioner, namely, Satinder Singh Bhasin to positively furnish a list of his assets and liabiities. Shri Ojha, learned counsel submits that the same shall be positively done by Monday i.e. 04th May, 2026. (IV) All assets of the original petitioner shall remain frozen and no third-party right shall be created. (V) The rental income being received by non-applicant/original petitioner in the name of different companies where he is a promoter- shareholder, save and except, the companies which are now the subject matter of CIRP, shall not be released till further orders of this Court. (VI) The State shall also immediately initiate proceedings under the provision of BNSS, 2023. The Commissioner of Police, Gautam Buddh Nagar has understood the order and assures the Court of implementing the same.To recap, the Grand Venice project consisted of a mall and commercial tower. Approximately 63 FIRs were lodged in connection therewith in the States of New Delhi and Uttar Pradesh. Bhasin was accused of non-delivery of residential units, siphoning of funds, and impropriety in allotment of land in collusion with State officials.Vide order dated November 6, 2019, the top Court granted Bhasin bail subject to certain conditions. One of the conditions imposed was that he shall make every possible attempt to settle the claims of the complainants.Subsequently, a Miscellaneous Application was filed by the allottees on October 20, 2023, seeking cancellation of the bail, on the ground that Bhasin failed to make any concrete attempt to settle the grievances. It was claimed that, although he entered into settlement agreements with a few allottees, possession of the units was not given. He was also accused of siphoning of company funds to the tune of Rs. 50 crores to comply with the Court's order.Earlier this month, the top Court cancelled Bhasin's bail as he failed to comply with the condition to settle claims of the flat allottees, and also for siphoning of Rs 50 lakhs from the funds of Bhasin Infotech and Infrastructure Private Limited for deposit as bail condition, despite the Court's direction that the said amount should be from his personal account.Case Title: SATINDER SINGH BHASIN v. GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI | MA 1391/2026 in MA 239/2024 in W.P.(Crl.) No. 242/2019Click Here To Read/Download Order

Supreme Court Questions UP Police For Not Arresting Satinder Singh Bhasin Despite His Non-Surrender After Bail Cancellation

Debby Jain

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Supreme Court Questions UP Police For Not Arresting Satinder Singh Bhasin Despite His Non-Surrender After Bail Cancellation

Debby Jain

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers