The court admitted the petitions by the company to quash the criminal proceedings pending against it in a lower court.
The company’s argument was that the company can’t be prosecuted for the crimes which its erstwhile owner had committed.
The Enforcement Directorate had booked cases against Tech Mahindra Ltd along with Ramalinga Raju and others for offences committed under sec 3 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act.
Justice P. Naveen Rao said that Tech Mahindra cannot be held liable for offences committed by the old management of the company under sec 467 of IPC, which deals with forgery of valuable security, will and other documents.
He also said that the petition has covered under the Supreme court in Bhajanlal’s case and the court had the authority to quash the proceedings under article 226 of the Constitution.