JABALPUR, India, June 10 -- Madhya Pradesh High Court issued the following judgment/order on May 13:

1. The present matter is of some importance and in Writ Appeal No. 1274/2025 vide order dated 30-04-2025 it is observed that Vide order dated 09.10.2024 IG (Police) directed the I.O. not to take any action till the report from the S.P. QD is received. Accordingly, vide order dated 28.04.2025, this Court directed the State to produce the report of S.P. (Questioned Documents), if prepared. Consequently the report had been produced, wherein it was mentioned that until original documents are furnished, the report cannot be given on the questioned documents. This Court also observed that undisputedly initially the petitioners moved anticipatory bail application before the Sessions Court the same was rejected upto the High Court and thereafter they tried their luck before the Supreme Court. Regarding the issue that AGM has been stayed by the writ Court without impleading the company, it is the dispute in the present case that the respondent herein had whether resigned or not from the company and their stand was that they never resigned and it was forged resignation placed before the ROC and because of the said action taken by the appellants and their associates, they had to file the FIR which is pending investigation. In that situation when the respondent cannot participate in the AGM, the writ court has rightly directed not to call the AGM until further order. Accordingly, the writ appeal was disposed of.

2. Thereafter, present review petition was filed and vide order dated 08.05.2025 we observed that there is no ground to review the order dated 30th April-2025, however, liberty is granted to the Review Petitioners as undertaken by learned counsel for the petitioners that they shall furnish original papers as required by Superintendent of Police (Q.D.) in a sealed cover on the next date of hearing before this Court. Consequently, there are six documents that have been produced in the sealed cover and after opening the same we find that only relevant original document is D/1 which is communication dated 23rd June 2023 whereby Mr. Harneet Singh Lamba, the then Director allegedly resigned and his signatures are in original which has been accepted by the Board of Directors.

3. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the said signatures are forged he never resigned from the company in question, whereas learned counsel for review petitioner drawn the attention of this Court to the statement of Harmeet Singh Lamba which is Annexure P/2 of I.A. No. 10095/2025 whereby it is stated before the police station Madhav Nagar District Katni from 05-06-2018 to 11-07-2023 he was working as a Director but thereafter till date he is not working with the said company. The said statement is dated 22-11-2023.

4. Accordingly, the documents which have been supplied in sealed cover are handed over to Shri Bramhadatt Singh- Deputy Advocate General who is present before this Court and is directed to get sent the document D/1 and Annexure P/2 (alleged statement of Harmeet Singh Lamba at police station Madhav Nagar, District Katni) after taking from the said police station send to the S.P. (QD) Bhopal. It is made clear that the original shall be handed over by the said police station to S.P. (QD) and in that situation S.P. (QD) Bhopal is directed to prepare the report after verification of the documents D/1 which is original one with the admitted signature i.e. bank account etc. and thereafter file report before the D.G.P. The present order is passed only for the interest of justice just to know about whether Harmeet Singh Lamba and Surendra Singh Saluja may be have actually resigned from the company or their resignation is based upon the forged signatures.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://mphc.gov.in/upload/jabalpur/MPHCJB/2025/RP/800/RP_800_2025_FinalOrder_13-05-2025_digi.pdf)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.