Skip to content
Mumbai · Thursday, 1 October 2026

National Revealed

The Truth can never be hidden

City

Birla Pacific Medspa Case: Special Court Issues Process Against Yashovardhan Birla, Others Over Alleged IPO Fund Diversion

By Sohail Khan 27 September 2026, 1:33 am

A special court has issued process against Yashovardhan Birla and others in a Companies Act case filed by the Registrar of Companies. The complaint alleges that Birla Pacific Medspa Limited raised around ₹65.17 crore through an IPO in 2011 and that ₹33.4 crore was allegedly diverted through various entities. The accused must appear by October 13.

Birla Pacific Medspa Case: Special Court Issues Process Against Yashovardhan Birla, Others Over Alleged IPO Fund Diversion

Birla Pacific Medspa Case: Special Court Issues Process Against Yashovardhan Birla, Others Over Alleged IPO Fund Diversion | Representational Image

Mumbai: The special court has issued process against Yashovardhan Birla and others for prosecution under the Companies Act. According to the case lodged by Registrar Of Companies (ROC), the funds obtained through IPO for a company name – Birla Pacific Medspa Limited (India), were diverted through different companies.

ROC Filed Complaint Against Company Directors

The ROC had lodged a complaint with the special court against BPML, Birla and other directors of BPML for violations of the Companies Act in October 2021. The court has, while issuing a process against them, asked them to appear before the court by October 13.

As per the prosecution complaint lodged by ROC, the company and its directors called IPO and collected an amount of around 65.17 Crores for a company BPML. The issue was opened on June 20, 2011. However, the ROC claimed that the funds were diverted. It is alleged that, upon collection of aforesaid amount, funds came to be siphoned Rs.33.4 Crores through different entities like N.P.Enterprise, New Fashion, Ora Associates, Laxmi Trading, Skylite.

`;

Meanwhile, the court has also imposed a fine of Rs 500 on ROC, for submitting improper complaint copy with page number were found not in proper sequence. The court noticed that Page no 14 was after page 41. The court also noticed that various page numbers are typed, cancelled, re-written. Hence, the court said the pleading was improper and imposed a fine.

To get details on exclusive and budget-friendly property deals in Mumbai & surrounding regions, do visit: https://budgetproperties.in/

google-news-icon

Add As a

Trusted Source

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *