had a clause that the accused company would take full responsibility for purchasing the apartments after thirty-six months and would issue a post-dated cheque as part of the buy-back offer. Based on these representations, the complainant had invested Rs. 2,62,50,000/- in the project. On 27.06.2017, an MOU was executed between the complainant and the accused companies. In exchange for the investment, the accused company had allotted four apartments in the ATS Pristine project as security. It is stated that the MOU had detailed the payment of Rs. 2,00,47,500/- via cheque and an additional amount to be deposited as tax deducted at source. The MOU further stated that the accused company had agreed to purchase the apartments for Rs. 14,07,20,000/- with Rs. 8,36,60,000/- to be paid to the complainant. Consequently, a post-dated cheque for Rs. 8,28,23,400/- signed by Sh. Getamber Anand, was issued, with the remaining amount to be deposited as TDS. However, it is alleged that when the complainant had deposited the said cheque on 28.06.2020, it was dishonored. It is further alleged that attempts to contact Sh. Getamber Anandfor resolution were futile as he had refused to honor the MOU. It is alleged that the accused persons had fraudulently induced the complainant to invest in the scheme with no intention of fulfilling the buy-back agreement. It is also the case of complainant that the issuance of the post-dated cheque, knowing it would be dishonored, demonstrated a premeditated intent to defraud her. It is further alleged that though repeated assurances, both oral and written, had been given to the complainant, the accused had never intended to buy back the apartments, and had thus caused significant financial
