Vivo Mobile India Private Limited Vs Serious Fraud Investigation Office (Supreme Court of India)
The matter arises from proceedings involving Vivo Mobile India Private Limited and the Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO). The related Punjab & Haryana High Court judgment examined the applicability of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) pre-cognizance hearing provisions to prosecutions under the Companies Act, 2013. The High Court analysed the statutory scheme governing SFIO investigations, filing of complaints, cognizance by Special Courts, and framing of charges under the Companies Act. Referring to the provisions governing investigation, penalties for false statements, establishment of Special Courts, cognizance, and application of the criminal procedure law, the High Court observed that the Companies Act, 2013 specifically regulates these stages and constitutes an exclusive code on those aspects. It noted that SFIO investigations can be initiated only on authorisation by the Central Government or the Director, involve specified statutory powers and duties, culminate in an investigation report submitted to the competent authority, and that subsequent action is taken by the Central Government or the Director. The High Court held that the statutory procedure under the Companies Act governs these proceedings and concluded that the BNSS pre-cognizance hearing provisions do not apply to prosecutions under the Companies Act.
The matter was thereafter carried to the Supreme Court. By its order, the Supreme Court issued notice, made it returnable on 24.08.2026, recorded waiver of formal service on account of advance notice and caveat, granted two weeks for filing the counter affidavit/reply and one additional week for filing a rejoinder, if any, and directed that, in the meantime, proceedings in CIS COMA No. 24/2025 pending before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gurugram, Haryana, shall remain stayed. The Supreme Court did not finally decide the merits of the controversy in the order provided. Consequently, the challenge to the High Court judgment remains pending while the underlying proceedings stand stayed until further orders.
Cases Discussed
- Kushal Kumar Aggarwal v. Directorate of Enforcement, 2025 INSC 760
- Sanjabij Tari v. Kishore S. Borcar & Anr., 2025 INSC 1158
- Deloitte Haskins & Sells LLP v. Union Of India, 2025 SCC Online NCLAT 463
- Yash Tuteja & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors. (Supreme Court), (2024) 8 SCC 465
- Tarsem Lal v. Directorate of Enforcement, Jalandhar (Supreme Court), (2024) 7 SCC 61
- Sampath Ganesh v. Union of India (Bombay High Court), 2020 SCC Online Bom 782
Read HC Judgment in this case: No pre-cognizance hearing under BNSS apply in Companies Act cases: P&H HC
FULL TEXT OF THE SUPREME COURT JUDGMENT/ORDER
Issue notice, returnable on 24.08.2026.
Service is waived and notice is accepted by Ms. Madhulika Upadhyay, learned counsel, who is present in Court on advance notice/caveat. Hence, notice need not be served.
Counter affidavit/reply shall be filed within two weeks from today.
Rejoinder thereto, if any, may be filed within one week thereafter.
In the meanwhile, proceedings in CIS COMA No. 24/2025 pending before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gurugram, Haryana, shall remain stayed.
