Sheikha Hind Suhail Al Mukhaini Bahwan, chairperson, Bahwan CyberTek
| Photo Credit: Bahwan CyberTek
A former Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of Bahwan CyberTek group of companies has approached the Madras High Court alleging that its Oman-based chairperson had coerced him at her Dubai villa to resign from the directorship of 39 companies for reportedly causing a loss of $76 million. These companies are located in India, Singapore, Brunei, Taiwan, the United Kingdom, Australia, Oman, United Arab Emirates, Qatar, and the United States.
Justice N. Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy has entertained a civil suit filed by Durgaprasad Shanmugam and granted an interim injunction restraining the chairperson, Sheikha Hind Suhail Al Mukhaini Bahwan, from implementing a ‘settlement agreement’, through which the plaintiff had also given away his shareholding in those companies and had agreed to cede his other personal properties to cover the alleged losses.
The interim injunction was granted after hearing senior counsel P.S. Raman and A.K. Sriram for the plaintiff and senior counsel Satish Parasaran and Srinath Sridevan for the chairperson and the group’s global head of finance. The judge agreed with Mr. Raman and Mr. Sriram that the plaintiff had made out a prima facie case for the grant of interim injunction until the next date of hearing on March 23, 2026.
What does the complaint say?
In his plaint, Mr. Shanmugam, 62, of Anna Nagar in Chennai, told the court he was an alumnus of the College of Engineering at Anna University and a co-founder of Bahwan CyberTek, a global technology enterprise. He claimed to have built the company from scratch into an international business, spread over 50 countries, in a span of 26 years. He also served as the group’s CEO during the period.
The plaintiff was diagnosed with multiple myeloma, an aggressive and life-threatening form of blood cancer, in June 2021, and yet, he remained involved with the affairs of the group company to the extent his health permitted. In December 2025, he had to visit the U.S. for treatment but received a communication from the chairperson’s office asking him to meet her in Dubai on December 19.
Mr. Shanmugam postponed his therapy session and went to Dubai believing it was a regular business meeting. When he visited her villa at Palm Jumeirah, one of Dubai’s most exclusive addresses, he was intimidated by her security guards who confiscated his mobile phones, thereby depriving him of the opportunity to contact his family, friends, or lawyers during the meeting that lasted eight hours, the plaintiff claimed.
“She announced that her birthday gift to the plaintiff was that she had filed a criminal complaint against him, resulting in a travel ban that would prevent him from leaving the UAE. Upon hearing this, the plaintiff was shocked and traumatised. He immediately stated that he could die in the absence of life-saving medical treatment but the defendant number 1 (chairperson) stated that a criminal like him deserved to die,” the plaint read.
Further stating he was accused of causing a loss of $76 million to the group without providing any specific details regarding the complaint against him, the plaintiff said, he was coerced to sign a ‘settlement agreement’ divesting him and his family members of all the interests they had in a number of companies. The plaintiff said, the clauses in the agreement would prove no one would voluntarily sign such an agreement.
He also said the company employees had taken away data from his laptop and three mobile phones and still did not withdraw the criminal complaint that imposed a travel ban on him for more than 10 days. Hence, he began consulting doctors in Dubai and issued a legal notice to the chairperson on December 31, 2025. The plaintiff also lodged a criminal complaint in Dubai on January 16, 2026.
After reaching the United States, he initiated civil proceedings before the Superior Court of California to enforce his rights as an employee of the group and filed the present suit before the Madras High Court for declaring the ‘settlement agreement’ as invalid, unenforceable, non est in law, and null and void. The suit was filed after obtaining the leave of the court to sue the chairperson who resides in Muscat.
However, Mr. Parasaran said, an application to revoke the leave would be filed soon. Accusing the plaintiff of indulging in forum shopping, the senior counsel said, Mr. Shanmugam himself had conceded to have already filed a civil suit in the U.S. apart from initiating criminal proceedings in Dubai.
Published – March 02, 2026 05:45 pm IST
