Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

FIR NO. 235/2003                                    SEEMA by  SEEMA
PS GREATER KAILASH                                         NIRMAL
                                                    NIRMAL Date: 2025.07.23
                                                           16:07:25 +0530

next day, Jaspreet told them that software loaded is pirated one, purchased from a local market for Rs. 500/-. On hearing this, the complainant and his friends got perplexed and in the meanwhile they had also paid Rs.1,00,000/- for Franchise fees to the company. They realized that they were trapped badly. Then, the complainant and his friends inquired about the accused persons in the market from where they came to know that they all are fraud. Then the complainant and his friends they realised that they were trapped badly in their fraud as they had already paid Rs.9 Lakhs to the company and also spent Rs.10-11 Lakhs on office expenses. On this, the complainant and his friends reached the company office and asked for American contract papers, on this accused Amit Nagar refused to show the same and said they all are their confidential papers and they cannot show it to them. Now, the complainant and his friends were completely convinced that they have been fooled and their money has been looted. The complainant further stated that since their situation had become worse, they went to meet Mukesh, Amit Nagar, Taj Bhardwaj and requested them to return the money which they had paid to the company. To which, they replied that they are only the employee there and only Inderjeet can return their money. Thereafter, the complainant and his friends met Inderjeet and asked him to return their money, upon which he replied that if complainant and his friends do not want to run the Centre, he will get their Center sold and after that Mukesh, Amit Nagar and Taj Bhardwaj used to come at their centre with fake customers. Complainant further stated that one day, Amit Nagar also deleted his pirated software from their computer. Then for quite a few Cr CASES 92921/2016 PAGE 8 OF 42 STATE Vs. AMIT NAGAR & ORS.

FIR NO. 235/2003                                     SEEMA by  SEEMA
                                                            NIRMAL
PS GREATER KAILASH                                   NIRMAL Date: 2025.07.23
                                                            16:08:56 +0530

to install the software in the computer and also asked for software license , to which Amit Nagar replied that the software had come and license will also arrive very soon. Thereafter, Amit Nagar sent a company person for software uploading and when the software was being loaded, the Lab Incharge Jaspreet was also present there. On the next day, Jaspreet told them that software loaded is pirated one, purchased from a local market for Rs. 500/-. On hearing this, the complainant and his friends got perplexed and in the meanwhile they had also paid Rs.1,00,000/- for Franchise fees to the company. They realized that they were trapped badly. Then, the complainant and his friends inquired about the accused persons in the market from where they came to know that they all are fraud. Then the complainant and his friends they realised that they were trapped badly in their fraud as they had already paid Rs.9 Lakhs to the company and also spent Rs.10-11 Lakhs on office expenses. On this, the complainant and his friends reached the company office and asked for American contract papers, on this accused Amit Nagar refused to show the same and said they all are their confidential papers and they cannot show it to them. Now, the complainant and his friends were completely convinced that they have been fooled and their money has been looted. The complainant further stated that since their situation had become worse, they went to meet Mukesh, Amit Nagar, Taj Bhardwaj and requested them to return the money which they had paid to the company. To which, they replied that they are only the employee there and only Inderjeet can return their money. Thereafter, the complainant and his friends met Inderjeet and asked him to return their money, upon which Cr CASES 92921/2016 PAGE 25 OF 42 STATE Vs. AMIT NAGAR & ORS.

                                                          SEEMA Digitally signed by
                                                                 SEEMA NIRMAL
FIR NO. 235/2003                                          NIRMAL 16:09:00 +0530
                                                                 Date: 2025.07.23

PS GREATER KAILASH

he replied that if complainant and his friends do not want to run the Centre, he will get their Center sold and after that Mukesh, Amit Nagar and Taj Bhardwaj used to come at their centre with fake customers. Complainant further stated that one day, Amit Nagar also deleted his pirated software from their computer. Then for quite a few days, when their Centre was not sold out, the complainant and his friends again went to meet Inderjeet then he assured them to return their money with 3% interest. Complainant further stated that after a few days, when complainant and his friends again went to meet Inderjeetat his office, they came to know that company had shut down its office and has fled. This was around February 2002 and no information was given to them about the same. In compulsion, the complainant and his friends had to close their Centre due to which they had suffered lots of financial loss. Complainant further stated that after that, he visited the house of Mukesh many times but he was never found at his house. One day, the complainant and his friends came to know that the company had set up its office at 15, Satya Niketan, Delhi. Thereafter, the complainant and his friends went there and found Inderjeet sitting there who informed them that Mukesh, Amit Nagar and Taj Bhardwaj had fled away and they had also cheated him and once complainant produce said Mukesh, Amit Nagar and Taj Bhardwaj before him, he will return their money. Thereafter, the complainant and his friends went to the house of Mukesh and requested that once he along with his three associates should go to Inderjeet and get back their money. But that was a well thought plan of Indrajit as neither did those three persons meet them together nor they Cr CASES 92921/2016 PAGE 26 OF 42 STATE Vs. AMIT NAGAR & ORS.

28. Further, it is the case of the prosecution that Amit Nagar had sent a company person for uploading the software and when the software was being loaded, the Lab Incharge Jaspreet was also present there. On the next day, Jaspreet told them that software loaded is pirated one, purchased from a local market for Rs. 500/-. No computer device has been recovered during investigation to prove that a fake software was provided by the accused persons to the complainant and even Jaspreet, who is alleged to be the lab technician is neither examined as a prosecution witness nor arrayed as one. Thus, the prosecution had material witnesses to support the case of the prosecution but his name has not even been cited as witness in the list of witnesses and as such best witness have been withheld by the prosecution and benefit of the same shall go to the accused. Reliance in this regard can be placed on Amit Kantiwal v. Mukesh Mittal (Punjab And Haryana) CRM-A No.863-MA of 2014 (O&M). D/d. 30.03.2015.