city Limouzines

SEPT 2010

HC RELIEF FOR CITY LIMO ACCUSED

The bombay high court on tuesday restrained the economic offences wing (eow) and the enforcement directorate (ed) from attaching more properties of the accused in the city limouzine cheating case during the following three weeks, when the case will come up for hearing.

A division bench comprising justices b h marlapalle and amjed sayed was hearing a pil related to the investigation. During the hearing concerning the attachment of properties by the eow, an argument prompted ed to join as a party to the proceedings. The ed is investigating the case under the prevention of money laundering act (pmla).

Thousands of investors have been left in the lurch since august last year when cheques issued by the company towards returns on investments bounced. The investors are based in mumbai, delhi, chennai,kolkata and rajasthan.

Mubin solkar, representing one of the petitioners, said that the eow and ed should not be allowed to attach any more properties. The eow has attached 25 properties—flats and office premises—belonging to the company promoted by s m masood. It has frozen 56 bank accounts. The ed has also attached four properties.

It was pointed out to the court that investors have identified three properties, which solkar contended should be auctioned and proceeds distributed among them. “the ed should not be allowed to attach properties already identified by the eow,’’ he added.

According to eow officials, two of the three properties identified by the investors, have been attached. “the third is a petrol pump, which is not in the name of the accused,’’ an officer said.

Another issue discussed in court was that if the properties were attached under the pmla, investors were less likely to get their money back as the government would get the properties.

14th sept 2010

SPECIAL PUBIC PROSECUTOR APPOINTED

The Government of Maharashtra has appointed a special PP, Mr. Gharat is appointed as  special public procsecutor in this city limouzines case.

10TH SEPT 2010

DON’T USE IPC IN CASES OF CHEATING, COPS TOLD

Mumbai: A government order instructing the police to chargesheet cases in which investors were duped under the Indian Penal Code instead of the special Act MPIDA or Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors Act (in financial establishments) has been put on hold. TOI, in its reports, had raised questions about the move as the order was seen as an attempt to dilute the cases.

The decision comes seven months after the government issued orders, saying that since the Bombay high court had struck down MPIDA and its appeal was yet to be decided by the Supreme Court, it made no sense to wait for the ruling to chargesheet cases in which investigations were over.

There were several cases in which chargesheets were not submitted as the HC in November 2005 struck down MPIDA.

On August 30, special inspector general (law and order) Gulabrao Pol stayed the decision, saying it would be better to wait for the SC order before deciding on the cases in which chargesheets were not submitted.

The government’s order would have had huge ramifications, considering that MPIDA was enacted in 2000 after it was felt that IPC was not enough to tackle financial establishments which came up with lucrative schemes offering huge returns that sounded good only on paper.

There are at least 50 cases in the state where investigations were complete but chargesheets could not be submitted as MPIDA became defunct. In the remaining 454 cases, the chargesheets were submitted but the trial could not take place following the SC order which gave interim relief to fraudsters. A salient feature of MPIDA was that the properties of the firms could be attached and auctioned to pay the investors. If the government had gone ahead with its decision, properties attached under MPIDA would have to be released, benefiting the fraudsters. The EOW had objected, saying the government order will pave the way for the SC to take a view that since chargesheets are being submitted under IPC, there was no need to restore the Act, a move that will benefit the companies.

Moreover, the bank accounts of these fraudsters frozen under the special Act will also have to be activated. There is also the issue of limitation, where the magistrate courts would throw out chargesheets, saying the same were not submitted within the stipulated time.

According to statistics, over 6 lakh duped investors await justice and companies collectively mobilised over Rs 1,200 crore in the period 1996-2005, when the MPIDA was struck down.

Over 7 lakh investors collectively invested in the various schemes floated by the fly-by-night operators. Of the 7 lakh investors, only 78,000 got their money back. There were only six convictions before the Act was struck down.

3rd sept 2010.

Investors have again started asking for addresses as to where they should file complaints. Please see this list and file your complaints asap!

Mumbai EOW - Unit 5, Behind Azad Maidan Police Station, Fort. PI Wadhankar 24691377

Delhi EOW- , Qutub Institutional Area, New Delhi-110016 PI Sher Singh 26528165

Chennai EOW Chennai Economic Offences Wing CID. C 48, II- Avenue, TNHB, 3rd Floor,. Anna Nagar, Chennai-40. NA             04426220332     

Pune EOW - Police Commissioner's office, near Sadhu Vaswani Chowk, Pune PI Daghe 26208346/26122202

Jaipur -Vidhayakpuri Police station, PI Lo Likhama Ram             9928075080      ,             9024675080     

Bangalore- Seshadripuram Police Station, Seshadripuram, Banglaore - 20 PI Manjunath             080-22942586     

Hyderabad -Premises of DGP office 3rd floor Opposite Ravindra Bharathi Lakidi-ka pool Hyderabad PI Balaji Rao 23212814/23230456

Chandigarh - Home Guard Building Sector 17 Chandigarh DSP Baljeet Singh Chadha 2741900- 1420

WHAT'S A PONZI SCHEME?

According to the United States Securities and Exchange Commission, it involves payment of purported returns to existing investors from funds contributed by new investors. Promoters often solicit new investors by promising to invest funds in opportunities claimed to generate high returns with little or no risk. Since the earnings are never enough to cover the payments to investors, the scheme is bound to collapse. It is named after Charles Ponzi who gained notoriety for duping thousands with this technique in the US in the early 1920s. He did not invent the scheme, but his operation took in so much money that it was the first to become known throughout the United States.


Directors of Company:

EXHAUSTIVE LIST OF DIRECTORS

DIRECTOR SAYED MASOOD JAMADAR,

DIRECTOR GEETA UMAR RAZZAKI,

DIRECTOR SEEMA

UMAR RAZZAKI,

DIRECTOR FARHAN AHMED KHAN,

DIRECTOR SHEHLA KHAN,

DIRECTOR NAEEM MUNAWAR SAYED,

DIRECTOR AMBER RAZZAKI,

DIRECTOR RAJESH CHOUDARY,

DIRECTOR SANTOSH DAYALKAR,

DIRECTOR MANOJ VIGHE,

DIRECTOR RAJIV LAMBA,

SALES MANAGER AKRAM KHAN,

MARKETING MANAGER VIVEK PATIL,

MARKETING MANAGER ANIL D'MELLO,

MARKETING MANAGER CHIRAG DOSHI AND MR. KESAR BAIG (CA)

12th April 2010

http://www.hindustantimes.com/rssfeed/mumbai/City-Limouzine-head-wanted-by-three-states/Article1-530125.aspx

CITY LIMOUZINE HEAD WANTED BY THREE STATES

HT CORRESPONDENT, HINDUSTAN TIMES

Police from New Delhi, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu and Sangli are waiting to seek custody of City Limouzines chairman S.M. Masood in connection with a nation-wide Rs 2,000-crore investment scam.

The Economic Offences Wing (EOW) of the Mumbai police Crime Branch, which arrested Masood on February 4 this year from the outskirts of New Delhi, may also apply for Masood’s custody for the second time in connection with the ‘City Realcom’ scam. Masood had floated a real estate company and allegedly duped investors in a manner similar to the City Limouzines scam.

On Wednesday, Masood and his wife, Seema Razzaki, were granted bail by the sessions court in cheating cases registered with the EOW. The Pune police was given Masood’s custody.

Sources in the EOW said in Mumbai, cases had been registered against Masood at Kurla, Vakola, Bangur Nagar and Amboli police stations, but has been granted bail in all those cases. They added that in most other cases, Masood is likely to get bail.

He could have faced an uphill task in obtaining bail in the cheating case registered against him in Tamil Nadu had the Chennai police applied the stringent Tamil Nadu Prevention of Investors and Depositor’s act against him.

“The Chennai police has not applied the act against Masood and he has been booked there under IPC Section as in other states,” Masood’s counsel Rajesh Srivastava said. The special act, which is as stringent as the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act entails no bail for the accused for a maximum of six months.

Srivastava claimed that Masood could be a free man in a month’s time.

“Once his accounts and properties are de-frozen (released), he would be able to pay up the capital amount of all the investors,” Srivastava claimed.

http://www.dnaindia.com/entertainment/slideshow_foodie-news_1229756

Cookie Singh the restaurateur in association with Syed Masood soft—launched his upcoming restaurant Chor Bizarre at Fort.

9th Apr 2010

Masood got bail yesterday on FIR 74/2007. This is the Pansare FIR and the only reason he got bail is because the chargesheet has been filed in that FIR. There are only 22 more FIR's where he needs to get bail to walk free. How can he possibly pay even if police de freezed his accounts? The banks have closed his accounts given the number of cheques bounced at each branch.

I highly recommend, those in cities where there is no FIR, please try and register FIR's. Especially investors from Chandigarh as City had an office there.

Here is the detailed news on the bail:

http://www.dnaindia.com/mumbai/report_mumbai-limouzine-chief-gets-bail_1369119