Expedite proceedings to declare businesswoman proclaimed

The Supreme Court today asked the Centre and Uttar Pradesh government to expeditiously complete proceedings to declare a businesswoman proclaimed offender and attach her properties in India.
Ritika Awasty, a promoter of Bush Foods Overseas Pvt Ltd, is facing criminal trial in Uttar Pradesh on charges of cheating, forgery and criminal breach of trust but is evading arrest after she was allowed to go to London.
A bench of justices Arun Mishra and M M Shantanagoudar said that since her bail has been cancelled by the court after she failed to return to India from United Kingdom, the proceedings to declare her proclaimed offender should be completed expeditiously.

The bench said that the proceedings shall also be initiated for attaching the properties in her name or in her husband's name.
The court also deprecated the counsel for the woman for saying that Awasty is getting threats from lenders that she will be molested or raped when she lands at Delhi airport.
"Don't make such statements in court. These types of statements are not appreciated in court. Be responsible or we will refer you to the Bar Council of India. Since when lawyers are becoming spokesperson of their client," the bench said.

At the outset, Attorney General K K Venugopal said that necessary steps are being undertaken for her extradition from London.

The bench then asked Additional Advocate General Aishwarya Bhati of Uttar Pradesh as to whether her husband has been declared proclaimed offender or not.
Bhati replied that the woman's husband has already been declared proclaimed offender and necessary steps are being taken expeditiously to also declare her proclaimed offender in the case lodged against her.
The bench then asked as to what is the status of her properties in the state.
Bhati said that efforts are also being taken to attach the businesswoman's properties in the state.
The bench said that process should be completed expeditiously and posted the matter for further hearing on last week of January.

Earlier, this week on December 12, the apex court had pulled up the Centre for "not even bothering about" its orders on extradition matters and questioned the government's will in getting persons evading law back from foreign countries.
Awasty was allowed by the apex court to travel to London to see her husband and daughter on January 2016 after giving an undertaking that she will return by March 31, 2016.
However, the time was later extended till May 31, 2016, but she did not return from London which compelled the apex court to forfeit her security of Rs 86 lakh, cancellation of bail and initiation of contempt proceedings.

Awasty had challenged the Allahabad High Court order refusing to quash the FIR lodged against her but was granted bail and allowed to travel abroad by the apex court on an undertaking for looking after her husband and daughter in London.
The court had also revoked her passport after she failed to return to India by May 31, 2016.
On September 12, this year, the Centre and Uttar Pradesh had told that they have agreed that State shall initiate procedure relating to extradition and they are agreeing that Uttar Pradesh will take effect steps within three weeks.
The court directed the Centre to take appropriate steps within two weeks thereafter for extradition with the Crown Prosecution Services and sought details of her properties in India.

Earlier, the top court had asked Awasty to furnish her current address in the UK and the state had assured the court of appropriate steps for extradition of the woman will be taken.
The apex court had also asked the Centre to submit the income tax returns of Awasty and of her husband.
On August 29, 2016, the apex court had said that it is "prima facie satisfied" that Awasty has "committed contempt of this court by breaching the directions issued by the court, as also, violating the undertaking given to this court".