Syed Ashfaq Rahil vs The State Of Telangana
2024 Latest Caselaw 4235 Tel

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 4235 Tel
Judgement Date : 29 October, 2024

Telangana High Court

Syed Ashfaq Rahil vs The State Of Telangana on 29 October, 2024

       THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA


           CRIMINAL PETITION No.11384 of 2024


ORDER:

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 528 of

Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (for short 'BNSS') to

quash the proceedings against the petitioner/accused No.2 in

Crime No.200 of 2024 of Central Crime Police Station,

Hyderabad, registered for the offences punishable under

Sections 403, 406 and 420 read with 120b of the Indian Penal

Code, 1860 (for short 'IPC').

2. The brief facts of the case are that respondent No.2/de

facto complainant lodged a complaint against the petitioner

and other accused alleging that the petitioner and other

accused are cheating and defrauding the individuals by

collecting huge amounts by way of investment. He further

stated that Dikazo & DKZ Investments was established in the

year 2018, claimed to operate B2B and B2C businesses,

partnering with Amazon and BOULT. They promised investors

to give 8-12% monthly profits for their investments by hiring

influencers to promote their business. Initially, profits were

SKS,J

paid on time until June 2024, but payout of July was delayed.

The company cited RBI certification processes, releasing small

amounts to some investors. However, on 29.08.2024, the

office suddenly closed, citing a police report, and employees'

phones went unanswered, prompting over 200 investors to file

a case at Madhapur Police Station, which was redirected to

the Economic Offences Wing (EOW) due to the alleged fraud

exceeding Rs. 75 lakhs. Basing on the said complaint, the

Police registered a case in Crime No.200 of 2024, for the

offences punishable under Section 403, 406 and 420 read

with 120b of IPC. Hence, the present criminal petition.

3. Heard Sri Mohammed Abdul Qaiyoum, learned counsel

appearing on behalf of the petitioner as well as Sri M.

Vivekananda Reddy, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor

appearing on behalf of respondent No.1-State and Sri Aashir

Mehtab Khan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of

respondent No.2.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

petitioner is innocent as he has no connection with the

allegations made by respondent No.2 and has not committed

any offense as alleged. He further submitted that although

SKS,J

the Dikazo Solutions Private Limited was incorporated in the

year 2018, but operations did not commence until August

2020. In early 2022, accused No.3, joined in the accused

No.1-Company with a promise of support and develop the said

Company, but eventually took control over the company by

the end of 2022. He further submitted that the petitioner

transferred ownership, assets, and liabilities to Accused No.3,

as reflected in the Ministry of Corporate Affairs records, with

effect from 07.03.2024 and that the petitioner also denies his

involvement with DKZ Technologies, which was registered

under the name of accused No.3. Therefore, learned counsel

for the petitioner seeks to quash the proceedings against the

petitioner stating that no purpose would be served by

undergoing vigorous criminal trials based on false, incorrect,

and frivolous allegations.

5. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf

of respondent No.2 filed counter affidavit denying the

averments made in the petition stating that the petitioner

owns and operates DKZ Technologies, deceived thousands of

individuals with a promise of paying 8-12% monthly returns

of their investments. It is further stated that the petitioner

SKS,J

signed documents and received funds through banking

channels, with sufficient documentary evidence to support

these claims. Therefore, he prayed the Court to dismiss the

criminal petition.

6. At this stage, it is imperative to note that to quash the

proceedings under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., the Court has to

see whether the averments in the complaint would prima facie

show that the offence as alleged by the Police constitutes.

Further, while dealing with the petition filed under Section

482 of Cr.P.C., the Court has to take into consideration the

avermetns made in the complaint and the statements of the

witnesses and if the averments made therein do not constitute

any offence, as alleged against the accused persons, then the

proceedings against the accused are liable to be quashed.

7. Furthermore, the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme

Court in State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Surendra Kori 1 ,

wherein in paragraph No.14, held as under:

"The High Court in exercise of its powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. does not function as a Court of appeal or revision. This Court has, in several judgments, held that the

(2012) 10 Supreme Court Cases 155

SKS,J

inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C., though wide, has to be used sparingly, carefully and with caution. The High Court, under Section 482 Cr.P.C., should normally refrain from giving a prima facie decision in a case where the entire facts are incomplete and hazy, more so when the evidence has not been collected and produced before the Court and the issues involved, whether factual or legal, are of wide magnitude and cannot be seen in their true perspective without sufficient material."

8. In the light of the submissions made by both the

learned counsel and a perusal of the material available on

record, it is clear that the petitioner is a partner in accused

No.1-Company, as evidenced by the Memorandum of

Understanding. Despite adding accused No.3 as a Director,

the petitioner remains accountable for fulfilling the promises

made to thousands of investors who invested their lifetime

savings and took loans. The substantial fund collected by the

petitioner over the years cannot be shifted to the responsibility

of accused No.3. Multiple investors possess documentary

evidence, contradicting claims that the FIR was filed to extort

money. The signed documents of the petitioner and banking