Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Naresh Balasubramaniam, a resident of Malaysia, filed a criminal petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking quashing of the charge sheet dated 18.10.2016 in C.C.No.23238/2016 pending before the I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore, and all proceedings pursuant thereto. The background of the case is that respondent no.2, Ms. Pragya, filed a complaint on 22.6.2016 before the Cyber Crime Police Station, CID Division, Bangalore, which was registered as Crime No.66/2016. The complainant alleged that she came into contact with one Harsha Ramesh, who introduced himself as a representative of Q-Net Limited, an international multi-level marketing company. She was persuaded to join a commission-based network and was lured with promises of large profits by investing nominal amounts. She was required to purchase lifestyle items through internet transactions and involve two others to trigger a chain of transactions. She was told that the Q-Net business in India was conducted by M/s Vihaan Direct Selling (India) Pvt. Ltd. She transferred Rs.2.55 lakh online and paid Rs.55,000 in cash. She later became unsure of the genuineness of the business. The police investigated and filed a charge sheet against the petitioner and others for offences under Sections 420, 406, 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 4 of the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978. The petitioner contended that he was not involved in the alleged scheme and that no prima facie case was made out against him. The court analyzed the allegations and found that the petitioner was not directly involved in the transactions with the complainant. The court held that the essential ingredients of cheating, criminal breach of trust, and money circulation scheme were not satisfied against the petitioner. The court quashed the charge sheet and all proceedings against the petitioner, allowing the petition.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Quashing of FIR - Section 482 CrPC - Inherent Powers - The High Court can quash criminal proceedings if the allegations do not disclose any offence or are an abuse of process of law. (Para 1-10) B) Cheating - Ingredients - Section 420 IPC - Deception and Dishonest Inducement - For an offence under Section 420 IPC, there must be deception of a person and dishonest inducement to deliver property. Mere failure to fulfill a promise is not cheating. (Para 5-8) C) Criminal Breach of Trust - Section 406 IPC - Entrustment - For an offence under Section 406 IPC, there must be entrustment of property and dishonest misappropriation. No entrustment to the petitioner was alleged. (Para 5-8) D) Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes - Section 4 of the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978 - Applicability - The scheme must be a money circulation scheme as defined under the Act. The allegations did not establish that the petitioner was involved in such a scheme. (Para 5-8) E) Criminal Conspiracy - Section 120B IPC - Overt Act - For conspiracy, there must be an agreement to commit an offence and an overt act. No such agreement or act was attributed to the petitioner. (Para 5-8)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the criminal proceedings against the petitioner for offences under Sections 420, 406, 120B IPC and Section 4 of the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978 should be quashed on the ground that no prima facie case is made out against him.
Final Decision
The petition is allowed. The charge sheet dated 18.10.2016 in C.C.No.23238/2016, the order taking cognizance dated 18.10.2016 passed by the I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore, and all proceedings pursuant thereto are quashed as against the petitioner.
Law Points
- Quashing of criminal proceedings under Section 482 CrPC
- Multi-level marketing scheme
- Cheating
- Criminal breach of trust
- Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act
- 1978
- No prima facie case
- Abuse of process of law
