Chattisgarh High Court
Pranav Mishra vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 19 September, 2023
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
Neutral Citation
2023:CGHC:23191
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
CRMP No. 163 of 2017
1. Pranav Mishra S/o Shri Shyam Shankar Mishra, Aged About 35 Years R/o
Plot No. 404, C Block, Park Residency , Police Station- Telibandha,
Raipur, Chhattisgarh
2. Nagendra Singh Nandre S/o Shri Sarabjit Singh Aged About 39 Years R/o
Plot No. 19, Kusum Nagar, Risali, Police Station- Newai, District- Durg,
Chhattisgarh.
---- Petitioners
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station-
Supela, District- Durg, Chhattisgarh
---- Respondent
(Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioners : None For Respondent/State : Mr. Avinash Singh, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 19.09.2023 None appears on behalf of the petitioners when the case is called out for hearing. Also heard Mr. Avinash Singh, learned Panel Lawyer appearing for respondent/State.
2. The present CRMP has been filed by the petitioners with the following prayers:
"(i) That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow this application/petition filed under Section 482 of the Criminal Neutral Citation 2023:CGHC:23191 2 Procedure Code and thereby calls for the entire records pertaining to the present case for the kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court.
(ii) That, this Hon'ble Court may Kindly be pleased to examine the correctness, legality and propriety of the charges/offences registered against the petitioners/applicants under the provisions of Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1976and Sectrion 10 of Chhattisgarh Protection of Depositors Interests Act, 2015 and thereby quash the charges/offences registered under the provisions of Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1976 and Section 10 of Chhattisgarh Protection of Depositors Interests Act, 2015.
(iii) That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash FIR registered against the petitioners/applicants specifically under the provisions of Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1976 and Section 10 of Chhattisgarh Protection of Depositors Interests Act, 2015 as well as entire criminal proceeding initiated against the instant applicants/petitioners under the provisions of Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1976 and Section10 of Chhattisgarh Protection of Depositors Interests Act, 2015 may also be quashed.
(Iv) Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the interest ofr justice, may kindly be awarded"
3. The facts, in brief, as projected by the petitioners in this petition is that on 24-5-2016, the complainant (Shailendra Singh) lodged a written complaint before the Station House Officer, Police Station, Supela, Durg that Maheshwar Sinha and Sunil Uikey have falsely induced the complainant and other persons by assuring them to return the money alongwith interest and allured him to deposit/invest money in the name of a company BMA Wealth Creators Pvt. Ltd. and have committed fraud, cheating and breach of trust. The complainant has deposited/invested Rs. 11 lakhs on the false promise made by Maheshwar Sinha and Sunil Uikey. On the said complaint, an FIR was registered by the Police under sections 420 and 34 IPC. The Police conducted investigation and arrested Maheshwar Sinha, Bhikham Lal Sahu and surprisingly, the present petitioners/applicants have also been arrested by the police in connection with Neutral Citation 2023:CGHC:23191 3 the aforesaid offences on the basis of the complaints lodged by several other complainants.
4. It is pertinent to mention here that neither the name of the present petitioners/applicants was there in the FIR lodged by the SHO,Police Station - Supela, Durg nor their name was there in the complaint made by the several other complainants before the Police. On 30-08-2016, the police filed charge sheet bearing No. 687/16 under Section 173(8) before the learned Special Judge, Durg wherein offences under sections 420, 409, 120B, 34 of the IPC, Sections 3, 4, 5 and 6 of Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1976 and Section 10 of Chhattisgarh Protection of Depositors Interests Act, 2005 have been registered against Maheshwar Sinha, Bhikham Lal Sahu, Sunil Uikey and also against the present applicants.
5. The charge sheet has been filed under Section 173(8) of Cr.P.C as one of the main accused is still absconding and police has failed to catch/arrest Sunil Uikey. In the charge sheet, it is evidently mentioned that after investigation, it was found that BMA Wealth Creators Limited is a Broker Trading Company in which petitioner No. 1 is holding the post of Area Manager and petitione No. 2 is working as Branch Manager and BMA Wealth Creators Limited have given the franchisee to one Maheshwar Sinha by duly executing a franchisee agreement having various terms and conditions. It is also mentioned therein that after getting the franchisee of BMA Wealth Creators Limited, Maheshwar Sinha alongwith his colleagues Bhikham Sahu and Sunil Uikey, all in their personal capacity have falsely induced and allured complainants and several other persons including the clients of the Company by giving attractive schemes / offers to deposit money in the name of BMA Wealth Creators Limited in their personal accounts for trading purposes and collected more than 5 crores from the several persons including the complainants and even provided their personal post-dated cheques having their own name and signature to those persons including the complainants who have deposited money in their personal accounts in the name of trading Neutral Citation 2023:CGHC:23191 4 business. It is abundantly clear from the above that Maheshwar Sinha alongwith his colleagues Bhikham Sahu and Sunil Uikey systematically conspired with each other to cheat and defraud complainants and several other persons including the clients of the Company and there is no role attributable to the petitioners in connection with the aforesaid offences committed by Maheswar Sinha, Bhikam Sahu and Sunil Uikey which evidently shows / reflects that the petitioners are in no way involved in the crime committed by Maheshwar Sinha, Bhikham Sahu and Sunil Uikey and the investigating agency and prosecution have no incriminating evidences or material on record to prima facie prove and show the culpability of the present applicants. Thus, no prima facie case is made out against the present petitioners/applicants, hence, registration of offences under various sections/provisions of law against the present petitioners/applicants is a clear abuse of process of law.
6. None appears nor is any representation made on behalf of the petitioners to press this petition. However, with the assistance of learned State counsel, this Court proceeds to decide this petition.
7. In the petition, the petitioners have pleaded that the entire offence was committed by Maheshwar Sinha, Sunil Uikey and Bhikam Sahu and the present petitioners/applicants had no role. BMA Wealth Creators Ltd. who is engaged in providing financial services through its corporate entities BMA Wealth Creators Limited and BMA Commodities Pvt. Ltd. both are companies incorporated under the provisions of Companies Act, 1956 providing financial services/financial solutions to individuals and corporates. The Company is registered with SEBI, NCDEX, BSE, Stock Exchange of India and MCX alongwith other relevant concerned or connected authorities or institution relating to the business/services provided by the Company. The petitioners are employees of the company and Maheshwar Sinha is the franchisee holder/Authorised Person on behalf of the BMA Commodities Pvt. Ltd. As soon as the petitioners came to know about the crime of fraud and cheating that was being committed by the Franchisee Holders, Neutral Citation 2023:CGHC:23191 5 the petitioners immediately informed about this to Head Office of BMA Wealth Creators Limited, Calcutta and BMA Wealth Creators Limited intimated this to the Superintendent of Police, Durg and also to the Station House Officer, Police Station - Supela, Durg, (C.G.) much prior to the registration of FIR in the present matter. From the bare perusal of the offences registered against the present petitioners makes it clear that it does not disclose any ingredients of any offence of forgery or cheating or criminal conspiracy committed by the present petitioners as alleged by the prosecution. Further, BMA Wealth Creators Limited and BMA Commodities is a registered stock trading/broking company which is duly registered with various institutions, thus, the provisions of Prize Chits and Money Circulation Banning Act and CG Protection of Depositors Interest Act do not get attracted against the present petitioners/applicants at all in the present case as the BMA Wealth Creators Limited and BMA Commodities Limited has not committed any such offence as provided under those special legislation.
8. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent submits that the aforesaid F.I.R. has been lodged on the basis of written complaint made by the complainant Shailendra Singh against the accused persons namely Maheshwar Sinha and Sunil Uikey. During investigation the present petitioners have been arrested alongwith other accused persons because the involvement of the present petitioners in the crime in question has been revealed. It is also revealed that the present petitioners alongwith other co-accused persons have hatched criminal conspiracy and committed the offence. After registration of above said F.I.R., the police authorities of Police Station Supela, investigated the matter and after completion of investigation, the charge sheet was duly filed before the court of learned Special Judge, Durg. Thereafter, the learned lower Court has duly started trial and framed charges against the petitioners and the trial is under process, therefore, at this stage, the present petitioners have an alternative, efficacious and statutory remedy to produce all his defense and evidence before the learned court below and establish their innocence. However, without availing Neutral Citation 2023:CGHC:23191 6 such remedy, the present petitioners have preferred this petition, which is not maintainable and liable to be dismissed.
9. Mr. Avinash Singh, learned Panel Lawyer for the State/respondent submits that the inherent power of the Hon'ble Court under section 482 of the Cr.P.C. should be very sparingly and cautiously used only when the court comes to the conclusion that there would manifest injustice or there would abuse of process of the court, if such power is not exercised so far as the inherent power can be exercised when the allegation under the FIR or the complaint together with other material collected during the Investigation taken at their face value did not constitute an offence, thus, at this stage, it is not open for the court either to shift the evidence or to appreciate the evidence and come to the conclusion that, no prima facie case is made out. So at present after taking initial inquiry and material collected, the above sald F.I.R. (Annexure P/1) has been registered by the answering respondent against the present petitioner and other co-accused persons and thus, at this stage the petitioner is trying to mitigate a case that, he has not committed any offence as alleged, but at this stage the Hon'ble Court cannot appreciate the evidence and come to the conclusion that, no offence is made out against the accused persons. The Hon'ble Court should not shift or appreciate the evidence and come to the conclusion that no prima-facie case is made out. Mr. Singh relies on a decision of the Supreme Court in "State of Andhra Pradesh v. Golconda Linga Swamy" reported in (2004) 6 SCC 522) 2004 SCC (Cri) 1805; and in State of Haryana v. Bhajanlal (AIR 1992 Supreme Court 604). Accordingly, he prays for dismissal of this petition.
10. Mr. Singh lastly submits that the trial is in progress and before the trial Court, the matter is fixed for hearing on 30.09.2023 for recording of the evidence of prosecution witnesses.
11. I have perused the pleadings made in this petition and the relief prayed for by the petitioners. In light of the decision rendered by the Supreme Court in Bhajan Lal (supra) wherein it has been observed that the High Court may in Neutral Citation 2023:CGHC:23191 7 exercise of powers under Article 226 of Constitution of India and under section 482 of Cr.P.C. may interfere in proceedings relating to cognizable offences to prevent abuse of the process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice and power should be exercised sparingly and that too in the rarest of rare cases. No case has been made out either for quashing of the FIR or the criminal proceedings. Further no exceptional circumstances exists in this case so as to exercise the discretionary power of this Court under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. The petitioners will have ample opportunity to put forth their case before the learned Trial Court. The petitioners will have the opportunity to adduce evidence in support of their contentions and as such, this petition deserves to be and is accordingly dismissed.
12. A copy of this order be sent to the concerned trial Court for necessary compliance forthwith.
Sd/-/-
(Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice amita