E-Paper
Shine City: Cases pending against promoter in CBI court set to be expedited
According to the state police, 554 FIRs were lodged against Naseem by investors. Investigating agencies, including the Economic Offences Wing and Enforcement Directorate, have filed charge sheets in 527 cases.
Prefer HTon Google
The cases pending against Rashid Naseem, promoter of Shine City Group, in the CBI (west) court, Lucknow, are expected to be expedited when the court reopens on March 6 after the Holi vacation.
According to the state police, 554 FIRs were lodged against Naseem by investors. Investigating agencies, including the Economic Offences Wing and Enforcement Directorate, have filed charge sheets in 527 cases.
The process to bring Naseem back to India has now expedited after his arrest in Dubai. The action, taken at the request of the Enforcement Directorate and Economic Offences Wing, is seen as a major breakthrough against the long-absconding accused.
The cases against Naseem will be opened once he is brought to Lucknow (after extradition), said Rakesh Pandey, district government counsel (crime).
In May 2025, the ED filed a case under the Fugitive Economic Offenders Act, 2018, against Rashid Naseem, the promoter of Shine City.
The court of judge Rahul Prakash (CBI West) in the state capital took cognizance of the case.
This is the first such case filed against a fugitive criminal in the state and will allow Rashid’s assets abroad to be confiscated.
According to the ED, Rashid iverted funds through shell companies into accounts of his foreign companies. This fund was used to purchase properties.
Now, ED is likely to identify and seize his properties in Dubai and other foreign locations.
Certain conditions apply when filing a case under the Fugitive Economic Offenders Act, 2018. For example, the fleeing criminal must be involved in an economic crime exceeding ₹100 crore.
In addition, he should have refused to return to India and an arrest warrant must be issued against him by any court across India.
As all these conditions have been met in Rashid Naseem’s case, action has been taken under this Act.
