A Delhi court pulled up Delhi Police’s Economic Offence Wing (EOW) over its investigation in the case of real estate company Omaxe Limited — accused of not giving assured returns and possession of a property in an Amritsar mall to investors — and ordered that an FIR be registered against the company.
Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Manish Khurana said, “The manner in which the complaint was closed by the EOW, and the manner in which the status reports were filed, reveal the sorry state of affairs at EOW. The connivance of the Investigating Officer (IO) with the alleged accused, who has deep pockets, cannot be ruled out.”
According to the court, the complainant prima facie revealed that the case required a police investigation. The complainant had alleged that in 2008, the real estate company “lured a few investors” for a new project launched in Amritsar.
According to court records, the complainant had visited Omaxe’s Kalkaji office, where he was “asked” to invest to the tune of Rs 10 crore in the property and was “promised returns”. The complainant had further alleged that the company did not take a No Objection Certificate (NOC) or required permissions from the authorities concerned.
He filed a complaint with the deputy commissioner of police (EOW) on August 20, 2015, but alleged that no action was taken. The court had demanded a status report from the EOW, where the IO said that the accused company had “properly obtained all necessary approvals”, and that “5% of balance amount was not paid by the investors and, therefore, the property could not be handed (over)”. CMM Khurana said that in the status report, the IO did not mention why the assured return on the investment was not paid to the complainant as agreed; how the fresh lease agreement was executed by the accused company to a different company; and why possession of the property was not handed over to the investors.
“Every averment made by the IO…have been made to shield the criminality involved…,” the court said.
A spokesperson of Omaxe Limited said that the company had started the constructions as per the approvals from the Municipal Corporation. “The issue raised by the complainant was payment of assured return…the Company has paid assured returns to all the applicants, including the complainant from 29.11.2007 for next 29 months,” said the spokesperson.