No settlement in cheating case relating to Hero Motocorp's Pawan Munjal, HC to hear case in January

Pawan Munjal CMD- Hero MotoCorp

The Delhi High Court was on December 6 that there was no settlement between the parties in a cheating case involving Hero Motocorp, its Chairman and Managing Director Pawan Kant Munjal and other executives of the company.

The HC will now hear the case on merits on January 24, the interim stay on the criminal proceedings will continue in the meantime. During the hearing senior advocates Sandeep Sethi and Mukul Rohatgi told the court that they could not arrive at a settlement with Brains Logistics Pvt. Ltd and its Promoter - Roop Darshan Pandey, as a result of which they will now have to argue the case on merits.

Lawyers for Brain Logistics urged the court to vacate the interim stay and permit the investigation to continue. However, the judge noted that vacation of stay would require elaborate arguments and adjourned the case owing to paucity of time.

This case is not related to the money laundering investigation being carried out by the Enforcement Directorate and the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI), an investigative arm of the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC).

Casefile:

In October 2023,  Vasant Kunj Police Station filed a first information report (FIR) against the company and officials over a cheating allegation. The FIR relates to an old matter dating back before 2010.

Regarding the FIR filed against the company and its officials, the company in its statement said, "This is to inform you that it is an old matter about the year 2009-10 with a disgruntled service provider, Brains Logistics Pvt. Ltd. (Promoter - Roop Darshan Pandey). It may also be noted that while the complainant has mentioned company officials in the complaint, however, no official has been named in the FIR. In 2013, Hero MotoCorp also registered an FIR against them and the matter is ongoing before the competent court."

On October 12, the Delhi High Court stayed the case proceedings directed both the parties to explore the possibility of settlement and adjourned the case to December 6. On November 2, the complaining moved an application asking the court to vacate the stay, the HC issued notice in the application and kept it for hearing on December 6.