Aegon Life Insurance Company Ltd. and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

(Judgment) (1) Cri. Appln. No. 0463 of 2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD.

Criminal Application No. 0463 of 2018

`District : Aurangabad`
`1. Aegon Life Insurance Company Ltd.` `(Formerly known as Aegon Religare` `Life Insurance Company Ltd.),`
`Registered office at Building No.1,` `Third Floor, Unit No.1,` `Nesco Park,` `Western Express Highway,`
`Goregaon (E), Mumbai - 400 063.`
`2. Chairman,` `Aegon Life Insurance Company Ltd.`
`(Formerly known as Aegon Religare` `Life Insurance Company Ltd.),`
`Registered office at Building No.1,` `Third Floor, Unit No.1,` `Nesco Park,`
`Western Express Highway,` `.. Applicants`
`Goregaon (E), Mumbai - 400 063.`
`3. Executive Director,` `Aegon Life Insurance Company Ltd.`
`(Formerly known as Aegon Religare` `Life Insurance Company Ltd.),`
`Registered office at Building No.1,`
`Third Floor, Unit No.1,`
`Nesco Park,`
`Western Express Highway,`
`Goregaon (E), Mumbai - 400 063.`
`(Represented for applicant` `nos.01 to 03 by`
`Shri Ashish Kishor Ovalekar,`
`Age : 40 years,`
`Occupation : Service as`
`Assistant Vice-President`
`(Legal), Employee Code 15616.`

¶5

versus

¶6

(Judgment) (2) Cri. Appln. No. 0463 of 2018

¶7

1.The State of Maharashtra,
Through Kannad Police Station,
Dist. Aurangabad.
2.Sanjay s/o. Nemichand Ambekar,
Age : 47 years, .. Non-applicants.
Occupation : Business,
R/o. Near Kannad Khandsari
Area, Kannad,
Taluka Kannad,
Dist. Aurangabad.

¶8

...........

¶9

Mr. Hemantkumar F. Pawar, Advocate, for the applicants.

¶10

Mr. S.W. Munde, Addl. Public Prosecutor, for non-applicant no.01.

¶11

Mr. P.K. Ipper, Advocate, holding for Mr. P.V. Barde, Advocate, non-applicant no.02.

¶12

...........

¶13

CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE & SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, JJ.

¶14

 DATE : 09TH MARCH 2018

¶15

JUDGMENT [Per Smt. Vibha Kankanwadi, J.] :

¶16

01.The applicant no.01 - Company has filed this
application invoking the inherent powers of this
Court under Section 482 read with Section 320 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, to get the first
information report quashed and set aside which has
been filed on the basis of the information lodged
non-applicant no.02.

¶17

02.The applicant no.01 - Company is a

¶18

(Judgment) (3) Cri. Appln. No. 0463 of 2018

¶19

registered Company having its head office at the
given address. Applicant nos.02 and 03 are ex-
chairman and executive director. The applicants came
to know about the registration of the crime against
them with Kannad Police Station, for the offences
punishable under Sections 406, 409, 417, 419, 420,
427, 468, 471, 120B, read with Section 34 of the
Indian Penal Code vide C.R. No. I-088/2016 on the
information given by non-applicant no.02. The FIR is
against 23 persons. Accused nos.01, 04, 07, 10, 13
and 16 are the Insurance Companies, whereas accused
nos.02, 03, 05, 06, 08, 09, 11, 12, 14, 15, 17 and 18
are the Chairman and Directors of the said Company.
Accused nos.19 to 23 are the brokers of the Insurance
Company.

¶20

03.The informant is stated to be resident of
Kannad city and educated up to IIIrd standard. He
runs a cloth shop named and styled as Rajdhani
Collection. He had taken loan of Rs. 1,50,00,000/-
from the State Bank of Hyderabad. In the FIR, it has
been contended that on 23.03.2014, when the informant
was proceeding towards Bombay, he received a call on
his mobile, around 03.00 p.m. to 05.00 p.m. A lady
disclosing her name as Shruti Desai, holding the post
as Assistant Manager, Head Office of HDFC Bank,
Delhi, talked with the informant and gave information
in respect of the loan facilities available with the
Bank. It was disclosed to him, that the said Bank
will give loan with zero percent interest. The State
Bank of Hyderabad was charging 14 % interest to the

¶21

(Judgment) (4) Cri. Appln. No. 0463 of 2018

¶22

informant and under such circumstance, he answered
positively to the proposal put forward by the said
lady. Thereafter, the dealing was struck.

¶23

04.The FIR further states that when it was
asked by the informant as to what he would be
required to do to obtain loan of Rs. 1,00,00,000/-,
then he was told that he has to take life insurance
policy of HDFC Bank for an amount of Rs. 2,68,000/-.
He was directed to submit documents. It was then
decided that the representative of the said Bank
would meet the informant at Ulhasnagar, District
Thane, as the informant was on his way. Accordingly,
that representative met the informant on 23.03.2014.
The informant handed over two cheques drawn on State
Bank of Hyderabad, Kannad Branch, for an amount of
Rs. 2,65,000/- and also the KYC documents. It was
also told after the lady was contacted, that the
proposal will be completed by 11.00 'O' clock and the
amount of Rs. 1,00,00,000/- would be deposited in his
account. Again after a lapse of two days, the lady
called the informant and put proposal that since he
is good with the banking, he can avail loan of Rs.
10,00,00,000/-. The informant then asked the lady to
give loan of Rs. 4,00,00,000/-. The insurance policy
required to be taken was to the tune of Rs.
4,40,000/-. She had then sent reprsentative of
applicant no.01 - Company and also the application.
The cheque was given by the informant in respect of
that amount. However, thereafter for about 08 to 10
days, there was no communication. When the lady was

¶24

(Judgment) (5) Cri. Appln. No. 0463 of 2018

¶25

contacted, she told that higher officer had sent e-
mail to the informant and asked the informant to
ensure amount of Rs. 5,10,000/- and thereafter loan
would be sanctioned. The informant told the lady,
that it is not possible for him to invest again. The
lady then told him that any of his relatives can take
policy. On that basis, the informant's brother
Sanjay invested the amount. Inspite of investing the
amount, the lady had compelled the informant to take
insurance of Rs. 2,68,000/-. He did not receive the
amount.

¶26

05.The FIR further states that, in all, the
informant has taken policy of Rs. 28,00,000/-. When
the informant started facing financial problem, he
tried to encash and get the amount as against the
policy. In fact, on the basis of the communication
and even the e-mail, the informant had got confidence
and, therefore, he had parted with his amount.
However, the Company has deceived him. With these
allegations, the informant had lodged a criminal
complaint on 26.05.2016 which was registered as
Criminal Misc. Application No. 240 of 2016, before
Judicial Magistrate (F.C.), Kannad. However, the
original complainant had approach the learned
Magistrate on 13.06.2016 with a prayer that he may be
allowed to withdraw Criminal Misc. Application No.
240 of 2016 with liberty to file fresh complaint.
The said prayer of the informant was allowed on
13.06.2016.

¶27

(Judgment) (6) Cri. Appln. No. 0463 of 2018

¶28

06.After withdrawal of said Criminal Misc.
Application No. 240 of 2016, the informant filed
Criminal Misc. Application No. 324 of 2016 on
14.07.2016. By an order dated 18.07.2016, learned
Judicial Magistrate (F.C.), Kannad, directed the
police to investigate the offence in terms of
provisions of Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal
Procedure. On the basis of the said report, offence
vide C.R. No. I-088/2016 came to be registered.

¶29

07.Applicant nos.01 to 03 had filed criminal
revision application before learned Sessions Court at
Aurangabad, challenging the order passed by the
Judicial Magistrate (F.C.), Kannad, below Exhibit 1
in Criminal Misc. Application No. 324 of 2016, dated
18.07.2016. The said case is still pending.

¶30

08.It has been contended by the applicants,
that the basic contention of the informant is that
agents / representatives of the Company had given the
loan facility to him with dishonest and fraudulent
intention. In fact, the applicant has registered
itself as a Life Insurance Company with the Insurance
Regulatory & Development Authority of India [IRDAI].
Accused nos.19 to 23 are independent insurance
brokers registered with IRDAI which institute
authorise such brokers to source policies of all
insurance companies. These brokers are not the
agents or employees of the applicants. For the acts
of such brokers or agents, the applicants cannot be
held vicariously responsible. Still the applicants

¶31

(Judgment) (7) Cri. Appln. No. 0463 of 2018

¶32

with bona fide and looking into the nature of allegations, by showing soft corner, is issuing / returning the premium which the informant had deposited through the brokers / agents. Applicant nos.01 to 03 had issued cheque of HDFC Bank in favour of the informant - non-applicant no.02 which has been accepted by the informant. The informant has received entire amount of premium which he had paid and, therefore, he does not want to proceed against the present applicants. They have, therefore, prayed for quashing of the FIR against them.

¶33

09.Non-applicant no.02 was served and he
appeared through Advocate. Heard Advocate Mr. H.F.
Pawar for the applicants. Heard Advocate Mr. P.K.
Ipper, holding for Advocate Mr. P.V. Barde, for non-
applicant no.02 - original informant. Learned Addl.
Public Prosecutor Mr. S.W. Munde was present on
behalf of non-applicant no.01.

¶34

10.A statement has been made on behalf of the
informant, that the informant had received the cheque
of the premium given by the applicants and he has
encashed it. Therefore, he has no grievance for
quashing the FIR against the present applicants.

¶35

11.It is to be noted that the entire
transaction is running around the representation made
to the informant and then his act on the basis of the
said representation. It has been stated that various
insurance companies had made representations to the

¶36

(Judgment) (8) Cri. Appln. No. 0463 of 2018

¶37

informant and the said representations were through
accused nos.19 to 23, who are said to be the brokers.
Now, as regards the allegations against the present
applicants is concerned, it was stated that the
premium was paid by the informant to the present
applicant no.01. How far the Directors i.e.
applicant nos.02 and 03 would be responsible
vicariously for the alleged acts done by the brokers,
is a question. But entire transaction is definitely
in respect of money that has been involved. The
parties i.e. present applicants and the non-applicant
no.02 have settled their dispute. Further, it is
also to be noted that the first criminal
miscellaneous application, that was filed by the
informant, was allowed to be withdrawn by the learned
Judicial Magistrate (F.C.), Kannad, with liberty to
file fresh proceedings and accordingly, fresh
proceedings were filed. Thereafter they have been
sent for investigation as per Section 156(3) of the
Code of Criminal Procedure. That means, the matter
is still at investigation stage.

¶38

12.Out of the offences those have been stated
to be committed, Sections 409, 468, 471 and 120B of
the IPC are not compoundable under Section 320 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure. Other sections are
compoundable either with or without the permission of
the Court. Without going into the technicalities,
whether those non-compoundable sections are made out
from the contents of the complaint or not, when the
complainant has received the amount which he had

¶39

(Judgment) (9) Cri. Appln. No. 0463 of 2018

¶40

spent and he is satisfied with that, we find this to
be a fit case wherein we should invoke the inherent
powers of this Court. No doubt, since the matter
relates to the financial affairs, yet it is based on
contract and when the informant is satisfied with the
amount which was offered by the applicants to him and
he has encashed that amount, the application deserves
to be allowed.

¶41

13.It is to be noted that the matter related to
contract. However, the informant had approached the
criminal authorities. The applicants, though liable
for the contract, have now come with application for
quashing the FIR and consequential proceedings.
Under such circumstance, we propose to impose
condition of deposit of amount with the Legal
Services Authority of this Court.

¶42

13.Hence, the following order :-

¶43

(a) The application is hereby allowed.

¶44

(b)The first information report bearing C.R. No. I-
088/2016, registered with Kannad Police Station,
District Aurangabad, and the proceedings in Criminal
Misc. Application No. 324 of 2016 before Judicial
Magistrate (F.C.), Kannad, to the extent of present
applicants, are hereby quashed and set aside.

¶45

(c)This order is subject to the condition, that the
applicants shall deposit amount of Rs. 10,000/-

¶46

(Judgment) (10) Cri. Appln. No. 0463 of 2018

¶47

[Rupees ten thousand] with the High Court Legal
Services Sub-Committee at Aurangabad, within a period
of four weeks from the date of this order.

¶48

( Smt. Vibha Kankanwadi ) ( Prasanna B. Varale )
JUDGE JUDGE

¶49

...........

¶50

puranik / CRIAPPLN463.18

Aegon Life Insurance Company Ltd. and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aegon Life Insurance Company Ltd. and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Afsarunnisa Begum Shaikh Nizam Vs Sreedhar Govindrajan

Hanif Gulam Rasool Makrani C-9118 Vs the State of Maharashtra

Girish Bhaurao Salunke Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Akash Pandurang Jahire (C-9605) Vs the State of Maharashtra

Shaikh Mustakin Shaikh Tukadu and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Shaikh Arif Shaikh Maheboob and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.