Delhi High Court
Abhishek Joshi vs State (Represented By : Nct Of ... on 31 July, 2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Decided on: 31st July, 2018
+ W.P.(CRL) 182/2016 and Crl. M.A.No.998/2016 (Stay)
ABHISHEK JOSHI ... Petitioner
Represented by: Mr.Salil Kumar Jha, Advocate
versus
STATE ( REPRESENTED BY: NCT
OF DELHI) & ANR .... Respondents
Represented by: Ms.Kamna Vohra, ASC for the
State with Insp.Gurmail Singh,
PS EOW
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
MUKTA GUPTA, J. (ORAL)
1. By this petition the petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No.474/2013
under Sections 406/420/468/471/120-B registered at PS Patel Nagar and
being investigated by PS Economic Offences Wing, Delhi Police. Though
respondent No.2 has been served, however, none appears on behalf of
respondent No.2. In response to the petition, Status Report has already been
filed by the State.
2. The arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner in
respect of the quashing of FIR in question are that firstly, the Delhi Police
had no jurisdiction to register the FIR nor the Courts in Delhi to try the
offence. Secondly, as per the contents of the FIR, no offence under Section
420 IPC is disclosed.
3. The above noted FIR was registered on the complaint of one
Ms.Paramjit Kaur who stated that she was a green card holder of United
States of America. Her daughter namely Gurpreet Kaur was a permanent
citizen of USA. Accused Kanwaljeet Singh was known to the complainant
and complainant's family for the last 10 years being neighbour. In the last
week of May, 2011, Kanwaljeet approached complainant's son namely
Sandeep Anand to contact the complainant. The son of the complainant
gave contact details of the complainant to Kanwaljeet who lured the
complainant. According to Kanwaljeet Singh, he had a business plan
through which complainant could earn US $4000 per month in United States
of America and he could also earn ₹25,000/- per month in India. Kanwaljeet
Singh stated that the complainant's daughter Gurpreet could also earn US
$3000 per month. The entire communication was made telephonically and
through e-mails and the son of the complainant was in talking terms in India
with Kanwaljeet.
4. Kanwaljeet introduced one Abhishek Joshi, the present petitioner
and represented him to be one of the leading businessman in U.K. and also
gave the registration details of the company namely 'Godoggie Limited' to
the complainant and stated that they were carrying on the trading in the
name and style of 'Godoggie Online Shopping Pvt. Ltd.' and they were one
of the market leaders in online shopping in U.K. and now wanted to expand
their business and establish themselves in the market of USA. They also
told the complainant and her son that the petitioner was the CEO of another
company namely 'Gadgets arena'. The registration details and the business
plan were shown to the complainant and her son. It is alleged that the
petitioner took the Social Security Number of the complainant and the
Californian Identity Card for the sake of checking complainant's credit limit.
Complainant was further told that the petitioner had also applied for the Visa
and registration of the company in USA but the Visa of the petitioner had
been rejected and they needed a person only for the purpose of opening the
bank account for its operation for which complaint would get US $4000 per
month and her daughter would get US $3000 per month. For this purpose,
the accused including the petitioner visited the complainant number of times
when complainant was in India and made promises. An agreement from the
e-mail ID of the petitioner was also sent to the complainant, which was
signed by the petitioner to lure her and to induce her to open a bank account
through which they would manage and control the entire activity. To show
his credibility, the petitioner and the other accused stated that they maintain
luxury cars and had their own office and residence at Patel Nagar, New
Delhi.
5. On opening of the account complainant was supposed to hand over
all the relevant documents i.e. cheque book, pay-in-slips, company debit
card, net banking kit including user name, passwords to the accused persons.
After the complainant and her daughter parted with their valuable
documents in the form of the Social Security number and Identity cards etc.
as per the terms of the agreement, the petitioner thereafter did not get any
agreement signed by the complainant. However, without the knowledge of
the complainant, she and her daughter were named as Directors of the
company and a second copy of the incorporation certificate was sent to the
complainant through e-mail. Thereafter, the petitioner induced the
complainant to open bank account in Las Vegas which was opened in the
name of 'Godoggie Inc.'. Another account was also asked to be opened
which the complainant in good faith and trust opened. The complainant
handed over cheque books, pay-in-slips, company debit card, net banking kit
including user name and passwords to the petitioner. Thereafter, all the
bank accounts were operated by the accused petitioner through the internet
from his office at East Patel Nagar. On 5 th August, 2011, the complainant
came back to India and came to know that number of transactions had been
done by the petitioner in her name making her liable to pay heavy taxes in
USA.
6. Later petitioner sent an e-mail with an attachment to the
complainant's daughter stating that the remuneration had been transferred
but the attachment containing the slip was found to be a forged.
Complainant also came to know that from Bank of America an overdraft
balance of more than US $8,71,520 was taken on the account of the
company maintained with the Bank of America, though the complainant had
not made any overdraft in this regard. Further, the bank account maintained
at Wells Fargo also showed overdraft balance of 17,000 dollars. Though
the entire accounts were being maintained by the petitioner but since the
name, Social Security number etc. of the complainant and her daughter were
being used, the liability stood on the complainant and her daughter.
7. During the course of investigation, statement of account of
M/s.Deutche and KarloTravel Services were seized from Kotak Mahindra
bank branch at Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi and it was revealed that the
partnership firm was in the name of Abhishek Joshi and Ashok Joshi, father
of the petitioner. On an analysis of the bank statement it was found that
approximately ₹45 lakh had been received in this account from the account
of Godoggie Inc. Bank of America, USA. Further, in respect of cash
receipts of the money also ID proof of the petitioner, his mother and brother
had been used for collecting money from Western Union Money Transfer
through M/s.Click Finance Pvt. Ltd., Karol Bagh, New Delhi and on that
basis approximately Us $20,000 (making approximately ₹9 lakh) were
collected by the petitioner and his family. A further sum of US $17,969
amounting to approximately ₹8 lakh was also received by the petitioner and
his family members. Though the petitioner produced to the complainant
two documents purportedly issued by Wells Fargo bank and Bank of
America mentioning that there was no outstanding in these accounts and the
accounts were closed in October, 2011, however, notices issued by the bank
in October/November 2011 were delivered at the address of the complainant
and that the accounts were closed due to prolonged overdrawn status of the
account of the complainant and she was directed to deposit the overdrawn
money.
8. Considering the allegations noted above it cannot be said that either
case is made out where the Delhi Police had no jurisdiction to register the
FIR or investigate thereon for the reason part offence is committed within
the jurisdiction of Delhi or that on the basis of complaint and the
investigation carried out no offence of cheating or forgery is made out. It
would also be appropriate to note that petitioner is wanted in two other FIRs
being FIR No.230/2011 under Sections 420/120B IPC and FIR No.31/2015
under Sections 420/468/471/120B IPC both registered at PS EOW.
9. Petition is dismissed.
(MUKTA GUPTA)
JULY 31, 2018 JUDGE
'rk'
