His Life’s Work Is Blend Of Personal Success And Altruistic Service: Allahabad HC Quashes Criminal Proceedings Against Azim Premji
The Allahabad High Court has quashed the criminal complaint proceedings, the summoning order and the bailable warrants against the industrialist Azim Premji in a case under the Equal Remuneration Act, 1976 (‘Act of 1976’).
Azim Premji, chairman of Wipro Limited, filed an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (‘CRPC’) seeking to quash the complaint proceedings pending before the Magistrate, the summoning order and the order vide which bailable warrants were issued against Premji for alleged violation of the Act of 1976.
The Bench of Justice Shamim Ahmed observed, “…the applicant's impeccable reputation as an industrialist who upholds the highest standard of corporate governance and his extensive philanthropic contribution should be taken into account. His involvement in the case appears to stem from a misunderstanding or misapplication of legal principles rather than any malafide intent or violation of the Equal Remuneration Act, 1976. The orders issued against him lacks substantive ground, as the applicant has no direct or indirect control over the alleged matter and in light of the applicant's distinguished career and substantial contributions to society, it is evident that the proceedings against him are unfounded and merit reconsideration.”
Advocate Karunanidhi Yadav appeared for the Applicant whereas AGA Ashok Kumar Singh appeared for the Respondents.
The Applicant submitted that he is the Chairman and Managing Director of Wipro Ltd. and has no interest in any shareholdings or managerial control over M/s G4S Secure Solutions (India) Private Limited. Further, the applicant being on the Board of Directors of Wipro has nothing to do with the day-to-day operations of the Wipro office in Lucknow and that he has no administrative control over G4S which is an agency which provides security services.
The Court said, “…this Court finds that the summoning order dated 03.09.2016 and the subsequent bailable warrant issued on 08.02.2017 against the applicant, lacks necessary legal and factual foundation. There appears force in the argument of learned Counsel for the applicant that the applicant has no administrative control over the functioning of G4S, he could not have been summoned for the alleged violation of the Equal Remuneration Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") under which the complaint has been preferred by opposite party No.2.”
The Court also noted that the Magistrate had failed to apply his judicial mind to the facts of the case and the law applicable thereto while summoning Premji and issuing the bailable warrant, the Magistrate had not examined the nature of allegations made in the complaint and the evidence both oral and documentary in support thereof.
The Court also observed, “Further, the journey of an industrialist is often arduous, demanding an intricate balance of vision, risk-taking, and relentless pursuit of innovation. The applicant, namely-Azim permji has exemplified these qualities, fostering economic growth and creating employment opportunities that have significantly contributed to the prosperity of the community. His enterprise has not only driven industrial advancement but has also catalyzed ancillary development, uplifting the standard of living of many.”
Accordingly, the Court quashed the complaint proceedings, the summoning order and the bailable warrants issued against Azim Premji.
Cause Title: Azim Premji v. State of U.P. and Anr. (Neutral Citation:2024:AHC-LKO:40489)
Appearances:
Applicant: Advocate Karunanidhi Yadav
Opposite Party: AGA Ashok Kumar Singh
