Act like a Good Daughter-in-law, Come Back to India: SC to Fugitive Businesswoman
Act like a Good Daughter-in-law, Come Back to India: SC to Fugitive Businesswoman
The Supreme Court was anguished over the fact that Ritika Awasty was allowed to go to UK in January 2016 on bail by the top court but she did not come back despite several notices and warrants.

New Delhi: Observing that she should behave like a “good daughter-in-law”, the Supreme Court on Monday said that a fugitive businesswoman residing in London will have to come back to "hell" once her days in "heaven" outside India get over.

"This is hell...there (in UK) it will be heaven for her but we will not let her live in the heaven for long. We will take all steps possible to get her back," said a bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra.

Justice Mishra was anguished over the fact that Ritika Awasty was allowed to go to UK in January 2016 on bail by the top court but she did not come back despite several notices and warrants.

"She will have to face the wrath of the law. We will leave no stone unturned. We cannot let her go away after breaching our orders," maintained the bench.

The judge's observations came as it denied any immediate relief to the fugitive's mother-in-law, whose property, too, was attached by the apex court in the case, compelling her to approach the bench.

After Ritika failed to return, the Court had directed the central government to initiate extradition proceedings against her. Two properties, including the mother-in-law’s house in New Delhi, were attached on court orders.

Appearing for the mother-in-law, senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi contended that she was a 75-year-old and she requires this house to live in. “What is her fault? She is an old widow living in this house. She has nothing to do with Ritika Awasty's running away," argued Rohatgi.

But Justice Mishra retorted: "You will have to get her back. Speak to her and ask her to come back. We can modify our order but only after she comes back. Ask her to behave like a good daughter-in-law and come back."

Rohatgi replied: "Who listens to an old mother-in-law? Don't make her pay for her daughter-in-law’s deeds. Get her by all means but let her live in the house peacefully."

At this, the bench said that it would consider lifting its restraint only after Ritika is brought back to the country and is produced before the Court.

On his part, Attorney General KK Venugopal said that the extradition request shall be forwarded to the UK authorities in three weeks.

The Court then adjourned the matter to March 13, asking Rohatgi's client to get in touch with the daughter-in-law and persuade her to come back to India.

Awasty, a promoter of Bush Foods Overseas Pvt Ltd, had been named as an accused in a case registered in Uttar Pradesh under charges of cheating, forgery and criminal breach of trust. She had moved the apex court after the Allahabad High Court refused to quash the FIR against her — not protecting her from arrest.

What's your reaction?

Comments

https://shivann.com/assets/images/user-avatar-s.jpg

0 comment

Write the first comment for this!