Ramkumar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 13343 MP

                                                                                  1

                                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                              AT I N D O R E
                                                                          BEFORE
                                           HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRANAY VERMA



                                                CRIMINAL REVISION No. 1908 of 2023

                           BETWEEN:-
                           RAMKUMAR S/O LATE SHRI TIRATHDAS
                           KOTWANI, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
                           OCCUPATION:   BUSINESS,  R/O  10,
                           KOTWANI NIWAS, PARAKH COLONY,
                           STATION ROAD, DISTRICT MANDSAUR
                           (MADHYA PRADESH)
                                                                                                               .....PETITIONER
                           (PETITIONER - RAMKUMAR KOTWANI PRESENT IN PERSON)


                           AND
                           THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
                           STATION HOUSE OFFICER THROUGH
                           POLICE STATION CITY KOTWALI,
                           DISTRICT   MANDSAUR    (MADHYA
                           PRADESH)
                                                                                                              .....RESPONDENT
                           ( BY SHRI BHUWAN GAUTAM - GOVT. ADVOCATE)
                           .................................................................................................................
                           Reserved on              : 01.08.2023
                           Pronounced on : 17.08.2023
                           ................................................................................................................
                                     This petition having been heard and reserved for orders, coming



Signature Not Verified
Signed by: NEERAJ
SARVATE
Signing time: 17-08-2023
16:23:04
                                                               2
                           on for pronouncement this day, the court passed the following:

                                                          ORDER

1. This Criminal Revision under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the accused/petitioner against the order dated 02.02.2023 passed in Sessions Trial No.202/2022 by the Additional Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Mandsaur, District Mandsaur framing charges against him under Section 420, 406, 120-B of the IPC and under Section 6 of M.P. Nikshepakon Ke Hito Ka Sanrakshan Adhiniyam, 2000.

2. As per the prosecution, the complainant Rajesh Soni and others, on being persuaded by the petitioner, had invested certain amounts in Kohinoor Nidhi Limited and Kohinoor Credit Co-Operative Society and were promised handsome returns against the same. When the funds invested by the complainant and others matured for payment the same was not done. In February, 2022 one Anita Soni called the complainant and others to Kohinoor Nidhi Limited office where they were met by Ramkumar Kotwani, the petitioner. There were about 3,040 investors also in the office. The petitioner stated that he shall make payments to the investors whose RD/FDs schemes have matured. In due course of time the Directors of the company, the co-accused informed the complainant and others that the present petitioner has taken over the company and shall be making all the payments. When the complainant

Signature Not Verified Signed by: NEERAJ SARVATE Signing time: 17-08-2023 16:23:04

and others went to meet the petitioner, the office of Kohinoor Nidhi Limited was not found over there. They asked the petitioner for payment who stated that he has not taken over any society and is not liable for any payment and that the complainants should talk to the directors of the company. Thereafter he stopped receiving the phones of the complainants.

3. On lodging of the complaint by the complainant investigation was commenced during course of which statements of various witnesses were recorded from which it transpired that the Directors of Kohinoor Nidhi Limited namely Aadil Hussain and Raees Hussain along with the present petitioner have received various sums by way of RD/FD, daily deposits and saving account but have not returned the amount to the investors upon maturity. The same was done by all the accused in collusion with each other and the petitioner actively participated in all the transactions. Upon completion of the investigation charge-sheet has been filed by the Police before the Court concerned and eventually charges have been framed against the petitioner as aforesaid.

4. The petitioner has submitted that he is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the case. His implication is solely on the basis of memorandum of co-accused recorded under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act which have no evidentiary value. No recovery has been made from the petitioner and there is no direct or indirect evidence to

Signature Not Verified Signed by: NEERAJ SARVATE Signing time: 17-08-2023 16:23:04

connect him with the present crime. The initiation and continuation of proceedings against him are illegal and contrary to law. Even if the entire allegations as levelled against the petitioner are taken to be true at their face value no offence is made out against him. There is no material whatsoever in the charge-sheet to show involvement of the petitioner. The petitioner has been falsely implicated only for the purpose of destroying his political career. The entire complaints and the proceedings are politically motivated. The petitioner has never connived with any person to deceive or gain undue advantage from or to injure the interest of the company or its shareholders or creditors or any other person. None of the investors have levelled any allegation against the petitioner of his direct involvement in the matter. The petitioner is neither a Director nor a Manager nor a signatory of Kohinoor Nidhi Limited. There are no signatures of the petitioner on any document in the entire charge sheet. There is no document to show that the petitioner has taken over Kohinoor Nidhi Limited. The statement of co-accused Raees Hussain that he has given certain amount to the petitioner is absolutely baseless. Though the co-accused states depositing amount in the account of the petitioner but there is no document in support of the said fact. The petitioner has himself along with his family invested amounts in the company and is a victim of the illegal acts of the co-accused. The petitioner had made complaints to the Police from time to time even prior to registration of the FIR. In support

Signature Not Verified Signed by: NEERAJ SARVATE Signing time: 17-08-2023 16:23:04

of his submissions the petitioner has taken this Court through the various documents which are a part of the charge-sheet and which have been filed by him before the Trial Court and also along with this petition to submit that all the allegations levelled against him are false and frivolous and are not borne out from the record. Reliance has been placed by him on the decision of State of Orissa V/s. Debendra Nath Padhi 2005 (1) SCC 568 and Rukmini Narvekar V/s. Vijaya Satardekar and others Civil Appeal No. 1576-1577 of 2008 decided on 03-08-2008.

5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent/State has submitted that there is sufficient material on record to frame charges against the petitioner as have been framed by the trial Court. The contention of the petitioner that there is no material or evidence against him is factually incorrect in view of which the petition deserves to be dismissed.

6. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record.

7. The complainant/investors in their statements have specifically stated that they had invested amounts in Kohinoor Nidhi Limited by way of RD/FD, daily deposits and saving Bank deposits and other accounts which were payable upon maturity. When they went to the office of the company for receiving their amounts upon maturity they

Signature Not Verified Signed by: NEERAJ SARVATE Signing time: 17-08-2023 16:23:04

were met by the co-accused Raees and Aadil, who told them that the company has been taken over by the petitioner, who would make payment of their entire money and that the office of the company has shifted to Nehru Bus Stand. When they went there they met the petitioner, who stated that he has not taken over any company hence he will not make any payment. The petitioner has however made payment to about 30-40 investors only. When he insisted the petitioner stated that he would repay the amount upon maturity as he has acquired the company but has not done so.

8. The witnesses Muskan, Pradeep, Anil, Manish and others have stated that they are the collecting agents/receptionist of the company and had been collecting amounts on behalf of the company. In 2020, the office of Kohinoor Nidhi Limited had shifted in complex of the petitioner. It is the petitioner, who used to take care of the management of funds of the company and also used to take meetings with the other co-accused. In February, 2022 the petitioner had called the entire staff to his office and had stated that he has taken over the company and shall thereafter be making payments to the staff and the investors. He stated that he would directly be receiving the entire amount of investments after which the entire funds used to be made over to him only. On 07.03.2022 he had assured the investors that he would make repayment of their amounts to them. They have specifically stated that earlier also amount used to be paid to the petitioner. On being asked by the

Signature Not Verified Signed by: NEERAJ SARVATE Signing time: 17-08-2023 16:23:04

investors the petitioner had promised them that he would make payment to them but has not done so.

9. For ready reference the statement of Manish Kodwani is reproduced below :-

^^01- o"kZ 2020 esa dksfguwj fuf/k fyfeVsM dk vkWfQl gkth esU'ku Lvs'ku jksM+ eanlkSj ls jke dksVokuh dh lezkV ekdsZV fLFkr nqdku dksfguwj Iyktk ij f'kQ~V gks x;k FkkA tuojh 2021 esa dksfguwj ØsfMV dks&vksijsfVo lkslk;Vh dk jftLVsª'ku Hkh djok;k x;k Fkk] ftldk vkWfQl jke dksVokuh dh nqdku esa gh [kksyk x;k FkkA

02- laLFkk dk vkWfQl lezkV ekdsZV fLFkr jke dksVokuh dh dksfguwj Iyktk nqdku ds lSds.M Q~yksj ij fLFkr Fkk vkSj FkMZ Q~yksj ij dksfguwj dks&vksijsfVo lkslk;Vh dk vkWfQl FkkA nksuksa laLFkk esa eSa Msyh dysD'ku dk dke djrk Fkk vkSj nksuks laLFkkvksa ds iSls dk eSustesUV jke dksVokuh ns[krs Fks] tks chp&chp esa dbZ ckj vkWfQl esa vkdj vkfny gqlSu o jbZl gqlSu ds lkFk ehfVax ysrs Fks] ftl ehfVax esa LVkWQ dks ugh cqyk;k tkrk FkkA

03- Qjojh 2022 esa jbZl gqlSu] vkfny gqlSu vkSj jke dksVokuh ds chp dksbZ fookn gks x;k] ftl ij 25 Qjojh 2022 dks jke dksVokuh us iwjs LVkWQ dks usg: cl LVS.M izfr{kky; eanlkSj esa fLFkr dksVokuh tulsok dsUnz ds vkWfQl esa cqyk;k] tgka ij laLFkk ds Mk;jsDVj jbZl gqlSu o vkfny gqlSu igys ls ekStwn Fks] tgkW ij jke dksVokuh us ge lHkh dks crk;k fd nksuksa laLFkk,a jke dksVokuh us vf/kx`ghr dj yh gS vkSj og iwjs LVkWQ dks osru vkSj fuos'kdksa dks mudh jkf'k jke dksVokuh gh Hkqxrku djsaxs vkSj mUgksus dgk fd laLFkk ds dysD'ku dk tks iSlk vk;sxk] og vo lh/ks jke dksVokuh ysaxsA mlds i'pkr Msyh dysD'ku dk iSlk euh"k cSjkxh

Signature Not Verified Signed by: NEERAJ SARVATE Signing time: 17-08-2023 16:23:04

ysus yxk vkSj euh"k cSjkxh mDr iSlk jke dksVokuh dks nsrk FkkA

04- fnukad 07 ekpZ 2022 dks laLFkk ds vkWfQl esa jke dksVokuh vk;s] tgka ij 30 fuos'kd ekStwn Fks] tgka ij jke dksVokuh us ;g vk'oklu fn;k fd og mUgs iSls ykSVk nssaxs vkSj dqN fuos'kdksa dks iSlk Hkh fn;kA eq>s osru ugh feyus ds dkj.k eSus ekpZ 2022 esa laLFkk dk dke djuk can dj fn;kA ebZ 2022 esa jke dksVokuh ds dgus ij eSus laLFkk esa yksu dysD'ku dk dke iqu% pkyw dj fn;kA mlh le; nksuksa laLFkk,a tulsok dsUnz usg: cl LVS.M eanlkSj ij f'kQ~V gks x;hA

05- esjs }kjk vkfny gqlSu o jbZl gqlSu ds dgus ij dksfguwj fuf/k fyfeVsV ds vkbZ-lh-vkbZ-lh-vkbZ cSad ds ,dkm.V uacj 099105002030 o ,dfll cSad ds ,dkm.V uacj 921020001806135 ls vkfny gqlSu o jbZl gqlSu ds }kjk fn;s x;s cSad pSd ds ek/;e ls jkf'k fudkydj vkWfQl esa ykrk Fkk vkSj mDr jkf'k esa ls vkfny gqlSu o jbZl gqlSu ds iSls j[kus ds ckn 'ks"k jkf'k jke dksVokuh ds ,-;w- Leky Qk;usal cSad eanlkSj ds ,dkm.V uacj 1711232115609069 o ,d vU; ,dkm.V esa tek djrk Fkk rFkk dbZ ckj esjs }kjk iSls jke dksVokuh dh iRuh t;Jh dksVokuh] yM+ds eksfgr dksVokuh o gkfnZd dksVokuh ds ,-;w- Leky Qk;usal cSad eanlkSj esa Hkh tek djrk FkkA esjs }kjk jke dksVokuh o mlds ifjokj ds [kkrksa esa djhc 40&50 yk[k :i;s tek fd;s FksA

06- mlds ckn esjs }kjk o LVkQ }kjk o fuos'kdksa }kjk esP;wfjVh jkf'k dh ekax fd;s tkus ij jke dksVokuh us uxj ikfydk pquko gksus ds ckn isesUV nsus dh ckr dgh ijUrq pquko ds ckn Hkh mUgksus dksbZ jkf'k Hkqxrku ugh dh vkSj laLFkk dk vkWfQl tqykbZ 2022 esa can dj fn;kA ckn esa LVkWQ o fuos'kdksa }kjk jke dksVokuh ls iSlksa ds fy, lEidZ fd;k] rks jke dksVokuh

Signature Not Verified Signed by: NEERAJ SARVATE Signing time: 17-08-2023 16:23:04

us dgk fd og laLFkk dk laLFkkid ugh gS blfy, iSlk gqlSu o vkfny ls yksA blh izdkj jbZl o vkfny us Hkh iSls nsus ls euk dj fn;kA bl izdkj mDr laLFkkvksa ds laLFkkid }kjk /kks[k/kM+hiwoZd jkf'k tek djokdj ifjiDork vof/k iw.kZ gksus ij fuos'kdksa dks jkf'k iznku ugh dh vkSj laLFkk dks can dj fn;k vkSj muds deZpkfj;ksa dks osru Hkh ugh fn;kA^^

10. The implication of the petitioner is also with the aid of Section 120-B of the IPC. Thus, even if the funds were not paid in the name of the petitioner or in his Bank account it would not make any difference since the allegation against him is of conniving with the other accused and making the complainants invest amount in the company. The petitioner is stated to have categorically refused to make any payment at a subsequent stage when the amount had matured for repayment.

11. Furthermore, implication of the petitioner is not only on the basis of memorandum of co-accused recorded under Section 27 of the Evidence Act but is primarily on the basis of statements of the complainant/investors/employees. Merely because no recovery has been made from the petitioner it would not make any difference as it is a case of conspiracy between him and the other co-accused. The documents which have been tried to be pointed out by the petitioner filed along with this petition and also before the Court below are not such so as to arrive at a finding that he is not in any manner involved in the present case. In any case they are not liable to be taken into consideration at this stage but at the appropriate stage during trial. Only upon the contention

Signature Not Verified Signed by: NEERAJ SARVATE Signing time: 17-08-2023 16:23:04

that family of the petitioner has also invested amounts in the company, his complicity in the matter would not be diminished in any manner.

12. Thus in view of the aforesaid, it cannot be said that there was no material whatsoever available on record to have framed charges against the petitioner as framed. On the contrary the material was sufficient to have framed charges against him. The judgments relied upon by the petitioner are distinguishable on facts and do not help him in any manner. Thus, in view of the aforesaid discussion, I do not find there to be any illegality in the impugned order passed by the trial Court framing charges against the petitioner. The petition being devoid of merits is hereby dismissed.

(PRANAY VERMA) JUDGE ns

Signature Not Verified Signed by: NEERAJ SARVATE Signing time: 17-08-2023 16:23:04