POLICE RAIDED OYO & EXTORTED ₹80 LAKH!....ONE OFFICER DIES DURING TRIAL!

Added: 2026-05-24

[00:00:00]Police team barged into Gurgaon office of Oyo and 80 lakhs forcefully extorted from Oyo management at the behest of the complaint. They have asked for some 51 crores my lords for the three properties which includes what is there in this. In fact, the two other similar cases my lords, this has been going on. The petitioners have been doing this have been trying to defraud hotel hoteliers and hotel owners my lords. In fact, there is owners of hotel the federation of hoteliers my lords have filed a case before the Supreme Court in fact.

[00:00:28]Against them? Against the petitioners.

[00:00:31]>> [music] >> Philosophically produce the charge sheet my lords at page number 70 my lords.

[00:00:43]170?

[00:00:43]>> the case wherein it's clear prima facie case has been made out regarding the offense of 420 and 406.

[00:00:49]Mhm. The investigating officer has clearly in column 17 of the charge sheet my lords has stated there's been a discrepancy in the ledger book which is present at the hotel physically my lords versus the final report submitted uh to the complainant my lords. Correct.

[00:01:06]The clear case of cheating is what they have indicated my lords in the >> Page 71? Page 70 my lords, 70. 70. All right, yes.

[00:01:14]Uh they have highlighted the discrepancies my lords. There after they have gone on to say that E G A R O P galu Mhm.

[00:01:27]Mhm.

[00:01:29]Mhm.

[00:01:33]Mhm.

[00:01:42]My lords, further in the further my lords, next sentence they have said that bouncers were kept by the petitioners my lords. This all of this indicates the intent my lords. There's been an intent to cheat the complainant my lords time and again my lords. Bouncers will cheat you? You know, my lords, just trying to to just to highlight the intention of the petitioner, my lords, that so that we don't go if this was on a surprise visit by the complainant that we got a hold of this ledger book, my lords, and we were able to see the discrepancies, my lords. Subsequently, after that, my lords, they uh kept bouncers and trying to uh restrict our entrance into the premises, my lords. And in the my lords, when the charge sheet has clearly indicated prima facie evidence, my lords, uh we believe that intention is a matter of fact and as a question of fact, my lords, then it must be tried, my lords.

[00:02:28]>> My lords, there's also a judgment of >> Good. your lordships.

[00:02:32]>> my lords. Yes. And there's another judgment of your lordships itself, my lords, wherein >> What's civil and crime?

[00:02:37]You know, my lords, wherein your lordships have said that as in case of even though a civil dispute regarding money recovery is pending, my lords, but cheating has been established, my lords, which has been established by the charge the sixth line, my lords. Yes. It is the tried law that criminal law cannot be set into motion for recovery of money unless the offense of cheating or even criminal breach of trust is established.

[00:02:59]My lords, in this case, my lords, the investigating officer has held that there has been a case of cheating, my lords. There has been an intention to cheat the complainants, my lords. In fact, the two other similar cases, my lords, this has been going on the petitioners have been doing this have been trying to defraud hotel hoteliers and hotel owners, my lords. In fact, the owners of hotel the Federation of Hoteliers, my lords, have filed a case before the Supreme Court, in fact, my lords. Against that against the petitioners.

[00:03:29]You have completed nothing. Sandesh, sir.

[00:03:33]You have the synopsis now so much has been told about what the charge sheet contains.

[00:03:39]The investigating officer, my lords, who filed the charge sheet, if my lords would notice serial number 21, 22, 23, my lords. Now, what he does say in the charge sheet.

[00:03:49]>> I don't know synopsis early. In synopsis.

[00:03:53]All right. Yes.

[00:03:57]They issue a notice under 41 a mellows.

[00:04:00]3 4 2023 10 mellows 10 4 2023 second notice which was issued under 41 a.

[00:04:11]Now please notice mellows 26 selling 10 4 2023 the police team they go to Gurgaon.

[00:04:19]One sec. You wait.

[00:04:22]Mellows I'm sorry. This notice code worker they gave us 7 days to reply.

[00:04:27]10th to get they go to Gurgaon.

[00:04:29]Please notice 26 what they do there.

[00:04:31]Police team barges to Gurgaon office of OYO and 80 lakhs forcefully extorted from OYO management at the behest of the company. Now we gave a complaint mellows to the commissioner of police mellows.

[00:04:45]There was an inquiry that was to happen.

[00:04:48]Mellows I understand the investigating officer mellows. He passed away.

[00:04:53]When he was facing the heat about what he did in Gurgaon mellows he passed away. And this is a charge sheet column 17 which is being read and column 17 is only to the effect of saying discrepancy in accounts. Now what is their case mellows? Their whole case is certain benchmark which they should have got they have not got. What is the claim filed by them? They have asked for some 51 crores mellows for the three properties which includes what is there in this.

[00:05:22]Mellows the judgments which were relied on whether it is Preeti Shroff or my lords judgments distinctly where there's criminal intent.

[00:05:31]But mellows where a matter is arising out of an agreement there's dispute in terms of who owes whom what. We have made the claim they have done the counter claim. In our claim mellows we have asked for few crores from them.

[00:05:44]They say we owe them 51 crores which is subject matter now before the arbitrator.

[00:05:49]Now in case of this nature, my lords, whether we see any ingredients of offense being made out or whether it is predominantly civil in nature, my lords.

[00:05:58]And the judgments which I have given is still 2025.

[00:06:02]And in fact, my lords, finally, my lords, my lords judgment in Malavika uh Periyaswamy, that's my lords judgment.

[00:06:12]>> latest 25th of June 2025.

[00:06:16]My lords, this one where they say even merely because you make your complaint voluminous or charge sheet voluminous, that is not what has to be taken into The content is important. And that's why, my lords, on the aspect of clever drafting, my lords, we have put in the other three judgments. Mohammad Ali Yeah, Mohammad Ali and then, my lords, Saleem, then Wajid. Even Wajid is also one more case of clever drafting.

[00:06:38]Three. Here, my lords, 950 and 951 950 is Mohammad Ali, 2023 SCC online is 951 is Mohammad Wajid. And, my lords, similar complaints which were done under OYO, the coordinate bench which has quashed it is also part of that compilation, my lords. So, anyhow we look at it, my lords, on three factors also. Predominantly a civil dispute, a cloak of criminality. Ingredient is absolutely lacking, and this is done as an only vengeful act of arm-twisting as to come to a settlement. My lords, those two cases Just Just to clarify, those two cases are on a separate footing, my lords.

[00:07:15]Yeah, this is Hemant Over. Please, my lords, no investigation was conducted in that. No charge sheet was filed, my lords. It was at the threshold it was quashed.

[00:07:21]>> At the stage of FIR that was That those two petitions were quashed. I mean, allowed. That's the difference. There's a division. In fact, my lords, Hello.

[00:07:29]Sorry.

[00:07:30]Hello, Peter. Hemant Over The fact, my lord, that they've under shown the bookings, under shown the accommodation in the hotel. So, intention to cheat.

[00:07:45]>> It's still intention to cheat is manifestly exists in the complaint. Just because the civil suit has been filed my lord, this cannot be taken away.

[00:07:52]>> Civil suit they like it or arbitration.

[00:07:54]Even arbitration my lord. Civil suit is pending.

[00:07:58]As the hearing progressed, the court examined allegations of cheating and financial discrepancies linked to hotel bookings and payments. The petitioner argued that the dispute was purely civil, a matter of money recovery, and claimed criminal law was being wrongly used to pressure them. But, the prosecution relied on the investigating officer's report pointing to mismatches in hotel ledger records and alleging a clear intention to deceive complainant, while also claiming similar complaints existed against the petitioners. The court noted that the investigation report contains substantive [music] findings, not mere allegations, and questioned why it should interfere at this stage. Ultimately, the bench observed that if the petitioner believes the charges are unjustified, the proper remedy would be to seek discharge before the trial court, rather than invoke extraordinary jurisdiction.

[00:08:45]>> [music] [music]