Observing that the order against Shilpa and Shamita Shetty was not proper or legal, the Dindoshi sessions court in Bombay recently quashed and set aside a 2022 magistrate court order issuing summons to them in a Rs. 21 lakh cheating case. The sessions court, however, said that the proceedings against their mother, Sunanda Shetty, would continue as a prima facie case was made out against her.
In his 2017 complaint to the Andheri (Bombay) magistrate court, businessman Parhad Amra, proprietor of Mervin Automotive, had alleged that Shilpa’s father, Surendra Shetty, had taken a hand loan of Rs. 21 lakh from him in 2015. Amra submitted that at the time of taking the loan, Sunanda and her husband, both partners in their firm, had assured repayment. It was alleged that after Surendra Shetty’s demise in 2016, the family refused repayment.
On February 11, 2022, the magistrate court had pronounced the order issuing process against the mother and daughters. Aggrieved, they moved the sessions court. It was argued by their lawyer that it was a business loan, therefore, no offences as alleged by the complainant were made out, and at the most, the present transaction may give rise to civil remedy. It was argued that there was no fixed time for repayment. Amra submitted a reply and argued that the magistrate’s order was legal and proper and, therefore, required no interference.
In its order, the sessions court pointed out that the sisters were not partners in their parents’ firm. As regards Sunanda Shetty, the sessions court said, “So far as the defence of the accused no. 1 (Sunanda) that the dispute is of civil nature, it can be looked into during the trial. At this stage, only a prima facie case is to be seen… the complainant has made out a prima facie case for issuance of process for the offences punishable under sections 420 (cheating) and 406 (criminal breach of trust) of the Indian Penal Code in so far as the accused no. 1 is concerned.”