Calcutta HC Rejects Quashing Plea Of Company Operating 'Online Legal India' Website In Cheating Case
The Calcutta High Court has rejected the plea of a Company-Fast Info Legal Services Private Limited operating a website namely Online Legal India seeking quashing of a cheating case registered against it.
The Court noted that it was not appropriate to quash proceedings without justified reasons at initial stage of investigation.
The High Court was considering a Criminal Revisional application preferred by the petitioner/accused under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking quashing of the proceedings under Sections 406/420/120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 pending before the Court of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate.
The Single-Judge Bench of Justice Ajay Kumar Gupta asserted, “During investigation, the Investigating Officer recorded statements of the witnesses under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Huge numbers of relevant documents, incriminating articles and gadgets were seized. It reveals that prima facie the incident took place with the de-facto complainant.”
Advocate Hindol Nandi represented the Petitioner while Advocate Rudradipta Nandy represented the State.
The Victim lady/Opposite Party No. 2, had lodged a written complaint before the Officer-in-Charge of Cyber Crime Police Station alleging that she received a phone call from an unknown number where the caller told her that a gift voucher worth Rs. 4,000 has been issued to her Kotak Mahindra Bank Credit Card. While following the instructions of the caller, a sum of Rs. 12,000was allegedly debited from her Credit Card. She realized she had been cheated by the caller and thus contacted a representative of “Online Legal India” who assured her that she would get back her money. The caller claimed that they have their own cyber cell, where they will register FIR and for that they will charge Rs. 1,179.The said amount was paid from her SBI Bank Account. It was also alleged that under the banner of one Website i.e. onlinelegalindia.com, the said company had duped so many persons in the same manner. On the basis of this complaint, the Cyber Cell registered a case against the Petitioner and two others.
It was the case of the petitioner that the company has a business to provide legal advice and legal assistance upon charging some fees from the client. Online Legal India is an online legal service provider portal of the organization, namely, Fast Info Legal Services Pvt. Ltd. The company had immediately taken steps for filling up an online complaint before Bidhan Nagar Commissionerate by filling up the necessary proforma. Immediately upon filling up such online complaint on the cyber crime portal, an acknowledgement number was also issued. It was further alleged that the Investigating Agency had sealed the entire company premises without conducting a proper inquiry. As a result thereof, a total 358 employees had become jobless due to the illegal act of the Investigating Agency.
The Bench noted that the complainant tried to contact the company further but they did not agree to talk with her and further used slang words.
“In view of the aforesaid facts that the investigation is under progress and yet to be completed, this Court is of the view that at this initial stage of investigation, it would not be appropriate and proper to quash the proceedings without justified reasons. The Court cannot embark upon an enquiry as to reliability or genuineness or otherwise of the allegation made in the FIR/complaint”, the Bench said.
The Court also referred to the judgment of the Supreme Court in Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others (2021) SCC Online SC 315 wherein several guidelines have been enumerated to be followed by the Court while exercising its power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.
Finding no sufficient reason or cogent ground to quash the proceedings initiated against the present Petitioner, the Bench dismissed the Revision Application.
Cause Title: Rajesh Kewat Managing Director, Fast Info Legal Services Private Limited v. The State of West Bengal & Another [Case No. C.R.R. 1175 of 2023]
Appearance:
Petitioner: Advocates Hindol Nandi, Satarupa Sarkar, Swarnava Mukherjee
State: Advocates Rudradipta Nandy, Sanjana Saha