Raj Lalit Soni Vs the State of Karnataka

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNNS) BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO QUASH THE ENTIRE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS INITIATED BY RESPONDENT NO.1, WHITEFIELD CRN POLICE STATION, BENGALURU CITY, AGAINST THE PETITIONER (RAJ LALIT SONI-ACCUSED NO.5) IN CR.NO.453/2022 (LEADING TO CC.NO.29575/2022 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE HONBLE XLVII ACJM, BANGALORE,) FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES P/U/S 66, 66B, 66C, 66D OF THE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ACT, 2000, AND SEC. 120B, 201, 419, 420 R/W 149 OF IPC.

¶26

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶27

3 -

¶28

NC: 2026:KHC:17713 CRL.P No. 16742 of 2025

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

¶31

ORAL ORDER

¶32

The petitioner/accused No.6 is before this Court calling in question the proceedings in C.C.No.29575/2022 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 66, 66(B), 66(C), 66(D) of the Information Technology Act, 2000 ('the Act' for short) and Sections 120(B), 201, 419, 420 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ('the IPC' for short).

¶33

Heard Sri. Omkar Basava Prabhu, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt. B. Pushpalatha, learned Additional Special Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent No.1.

¶34

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits qua -accused Nos.1, 8 and 16, a Co-ordinate Bench in Crl.P.No.8975/2022 disposed on 13.01.2023, in the very same C.C.No.29575/2022 has quashed the proceedings. The order of quashment qua accused Nos.1, 8 and 16 was tossed before the Apex Court only to be dismissed and the order of the Co-ordinate Bench has attained finality. Therefore, on the

¶35

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:17713 CRL.P No. 16742 of 2025

¶36

HC-KAR

¶37

observations made by the Co-ordinate Bench, the petitioner who stands on the same footing of accused Nos.1, 8 and 16, would be entitled to the same relief, as is granted by the Co-ordinate Bench.

¶38

Learned Additional State Public Prosecutor would refute the submissions to contend that the petitioner has to face the trial and the proceedings against the petitioner cannot be quashed on the same observations made in the order of the Co-ordinate Bench. She would submit that the role of the petitioner is different from that of the accused Nos.1, 8 and 16.

¶39

The Co-ordinate Bench in Crl.P.No.8975/2022 and

¶40

connected matter disposed on 13.01.2023 as held as follows:

¶41

"The Crl.P.No.8975/2022 filed by the petitioneraccused Nos.1, 8 and 16 under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing the criminal proceedings in C.C.No.29575/2022 pending on the file of I ACMM, Bengaluru registered by CEN police in Crime No.453/2022 for the offences punishable under Sections 120(B), 419, 420 read with Section 149 of IPC and Sections 66, 66(C)(D) of Information Technology Act, 2000.

¶42

The Crl.P.No.8708/2022 filed by the petitioneraccused Nos.1, 7, 6, 11 under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing the criminal proceedings in Crime No.454/2022 registered by the Whitefiled CEN police, for the offences punishable under Sections 120(B), 419, 420 read with Section 149 of IPC and Sections 66, 66(C)(D) of Information Technology Act 2000.

¶43

5 -

¶44

NC: 2026:KHC:17713 CRL.P No. 16742 of 2025

¶45

HC-KAR

¶46

Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner, learned SPP for respondent No.1.

¶47

Both the cases are arising out of the same offence said to be committed by the accused persons and filed at two different officers belonging to different police stations to the same CEN police and the complaint registered before the Whitefield CEN police one after the another on 08.07.2022 in Crime No.453/2022 at 12 P.M. against the same accused persons and Crime No.454/2022 at 12.30 P.M. filed by the Whitefield police officer. The allegation is one and same and the accused company and persons are one and same, except one of the accused No.7 in Crl.P.No.8708/2022 (in Crime No.454/2022). Hence taken together for common disposal.

¶48

The case of the complaint in both the cases filed by the both police officers Mahadevapura as well as Whitefield police alleging that the accused No.1 said to be a fake company running the call centre namely Ethical Infotech Pvt. Ltd., Gayatri Techpark Building, 1st Floor, EPIP Zone, Whitefiled, Bengaluru., and Ethical Infocom Pvt. Ltd also at No.23&24, Silver Soft Techpark, 3rd Floor, Mahadevarpura and engaging various persons as employees they used to call the citizens of United States of America stating that there was a gift from the Amazon Company and asking them to go and collect the gift. When the customers goes to the Amazon either to receive the gift or to cancel the order, they have to give the password and if password/OTP is given the accused company used to snatch/draw amount from the account of the customers. Further contended they are running the fake call centre therefore, prayed for taking action against the petitioners. After registering the case, the police arrested some of accused persons, they have been released on bail. The police investigated the matter in Crime No.453/2022 and filed the charge sheet, however there is no charge sheet filed in Crime No.454/2022 which is under challenge.

¶49

The Learned counsel for the petitioners has contended the accused No.1 in both the cases are employees of the Ethical Infotech Pvt. Ltd., which is registered company at Gujarat and running the call

¶50

6 -

¶51

NC: 2026:KHC:17713 CRL.P No. 16742 of 2025

¶52

HC-KAR

¶53

centre. The accused No.1 is only an employees of the call centre and the accused No.2 is only a travel agent who let out the cars to the call centre for picking and dropping the employee of the call centre and accused No.3 is stranger to the company and he has been charge sheeted to the police. Except accused No.7, who is one of the Director of the company and accused No.8 is a Travel Agent. The accused No.1-Rishi Vyas who is petitioner No.1 in both the petitions is employee of the company. The accused No.6 in Crime No.454/2022 is the petitioner No.2/Syed Ibrath in Crl.P.No.8975/2022 and petitioner No.3 in Crl.P.No.8708/2022 and accused No.8 in Crime No.453/2022 who was the travel agent. Accused No.16- Rishab in Crime No.453/2022 is also accused No.11 in Crime No.454/2022 said to be a stranger to the case. Accused No.7 in Crime No.454/22 is accused No.2 in Crime No.453/2022 - Jatiya Kishan Hirabai Bin Hirabai said to be Director of the company, has been falsely implicated by the police and absolutely there is no victim in this case. The police have falsely implicated the petitioner in this case. The charge sheet also filed without making company as accused and absolutely there is no complaint from any of the customers or victims. Inspite of examining 74 witnesses in the charge sheet, none of the witnesses are victims of the crime. There is no statement of the accounts seized by the police to show these petitioners were involved and cheated any of the public, either citizen of India or citizen of United States of America. Even otherwise, there is no person from Amazon company or Flipkart who have been examined to show these petitioners or have cheated any of the general public and withdraw money from their accounts. Therefore, absolutely there is no material against accused persons for framing of charge and conducting investigation. Hence, conducting trial is nothing but abuse of process of law, hence prayed for quashing criminal proceedings against these petitioners.

¶54

The learned SPP appearing for the State has contended that the accused persons are employees, including the Travel agent. All of them are connected with a fake company run by the accused persons which was registered at Gujarat State and there were crores of rupees which has been seized by the police by freezing the bank account. No body from the company have

¶55

7 -

¶56

NC: 2026:KHC:17713 CRL.P No. 16742 of 2025

¶57

HC-KAR

¶58

chosen to de-freeze the account and they have not filed any application to release the account or any properties which is lying. The Investigation Officer obtained the further order from the Magistrate for making further investigation in this matter. Therefore, the learned SPP has contended that there were 129 hard disks seized, including computer which were seized, clearly reveals the petitioners were running fake call centre. Therefore, matter required for trial and the court cannot quash the criminal proceedings. Hence, prayed for dismissing the petition.

¶59

Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned SPP for the state and perused the records. On perusal of the complaint made by the Mahadevarpura police before Whitefield CEN police which is registered in Crime No.453/2022 at 12 p.m. on 08.07.2022 and the complaint made by the Whitefield police before the same Whitefield CEN police at 12.30 p.m., which is registered in Crime No.454/2022 for the same offences against the same company called Ethical Infotech Pvt. Ltd. though two branches were situated, at Gayathri Tech Park building at Whitefield as well as at Mahadevapura at 23 & 24 of Silver Soft Techpark. The complaint is one and the same, where the police raided two places by different police team and they have seized vehicles, mobile phones, computers, pen drives, cash, etc., including the foreign currency notes. Ofcourse the police have filed charge sheet in respect of Crime No.453/2022 and no charge sheet has been filed in Crime No.454/2022, but the allegation against the Ethical Infotech Company Pvt. Ltd. is one and the same.

¶60

It is alleged in both the complaint, that the company is a fake company and it was involved in cheating business by calling the American Citizens through mobile phones and used to inform that they have ordered for some goods and they can go and collect them from Amazon by producing the OTP/password numbers and if the customers inform they have not placed any order for purchasing the goods, then the accused used to inform they are entitled for gift coupons and if they do not want to receive the gift coupons, they can release the same by giving OTP. Thereafter, if the customer given OTP number then the accused company

¶61

8 -

¶62

NC: 2026:KHC:17713 CRL.P No. 16742 of 2025

¶63

HC-KAR

¶64

used to draw amounts from the customers account. This is the sum and substance of the allegation made against the Infotech Company Pvt. Ltd., The police investigated the matter in Crime No.453/2022 and filed charge sheet. They reiterated the same in the charge sheet, stating that the accused company involved in cheating the people which is a fake call centre. On the other hand, the counsel for petitioners produced the documents to show the company is registered and it has Directors, Managing Directors running the business and contended that because of filing the criminal petition for quashing FIR and complaint, they have not filed any application for releasing the documents. However, some of the accused persons were in custody and they have been released on bail. The entire business has been seized by the police, therefore they are unable to do the business. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner contended that accused No.1 who is only employee of the company was appointed by the Ethical Infotech Company. Admittedly, the police even though filed the charge sheet as well as registered FIR in both the case, but the police not made the company as prime accused. Though they have filed charge sheet against Directors and employees of the company, including travel agent who let out the vehicle to the company for picking up the employees from these company and dropped employees from company to house. Ofcourse, the charge sheet reveals the accused persons had employed so many people from North India, however, there is no direct allegation against accused No.1 who is only employee of the company. He has nothing to do with the affairs of the company, as he is not the Managing Director, Directors of the company in order to receive any profit over the company's business. It is not in dispute the accused No.1/Rishi Vyas was only an employee of the company and he is not connected with any of the affairs of the company.

¶65

That apart, another accused namely Syed Ibrat said to be a travel agent who lent the cars to the company by receiving the rent for the purpose of picking up and dropping of the employees of the company on rental basis. Even otherwise, there is no evidence collected by the police, in order to show he is involved in the cheating business of the Ethical Infotech company and one Rishab who is a stranger to the company there

¶66

9 -

¶67

NC: 2026:KHC:17713 CRL.P No. 16742 of 2025

¶68

HC-KAR

¶69

is absolutely no material against him in order to connect with the crime and the accused/Rishab who is made as accused in both the cases. Except accused No.7 Jatiya Kishan Hirabai Bin Hirabai who is one of the Directors of the Ethical InfoTech Company, as held above, the allegation is bald and vague allegation that the Infotech Company is a fake call centre earning money by cheating the people. Admittedly, as held by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the main company Ethical Infotech Pvt. Ltd., was not made as an accused in both the cases. Ofcourse learned SPP has contended that the police taking action to file an application under Section 319 of Cr.P.C for impleading company as accused and if any such application is filed by the prosecution that has to be considered by the Magistrate. However, at present the company is not made as an accused, as only one Director of the company made as accused before court and the accused No.1 is admittedly employee of the company and another accused is a travel agent who lent the vehicle to the company and one stranger who has nothing to do with the company, is made as an accused.

¶70

That apart, out of these two volume of charge sheet, the police not produced any single evidence against these petitioners to show these accused persons are involved in running the fake call centre and collected money from any of the public either Citizen of India or Citizens of America. Simply they have seized all the materials, cash, cars, mobile phones, laptop but absolutely there is no incriminating material to connect the accused with the crime, in order to show the petitioners intentionally involved in the commission of cheating or fabricating the documents or snatched the cash belonging to any of the customers.

¶71

That apart, absolutely there are no victims or any complaint made by any of the public who have been actually cheated by these petitioners. Merely seizing some mobile phones from the place of business by the police by raiding on 8.7.2022, that itself cannot constitute any offence against these petitioners, in order to initiate proceedings and conduct trial to show they have impersonated any of the victim and cheated any of the general public at large. Therefore, I am of the view, that the police wants to further investigate the matter

¶72

10 -

¶73

NC: 2026:KHC:17713 CRL.P No. 16742 of 2025

¶74

HC-KAR

¶75

and they have liberty to investigate the matter further. They can file the additional charge sheet against the actual or real culprit. But at present, absolutely, there is no evidence against these accused persons for any of the offences committed. Though the judgment relied by learned SPP of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Bihar Vs Anil Singh alias Anil Kumar Singh and Others in 2021 SCC Online sc 1294 and other cases, it is well settled by Hon'ble Supreme Court in catena of decisions that when there is no material placed on record and no case is made out against the accused for framing of charge, conducting criminal proceedings is abuse of process of law and the court can exercise the power under section 482 of Cr.P.C and quash the criminal proceedings. Otherwise, there will be miscarriage of justice, therefore the judgment relied upon by SPP is not applicable to case on hand as absolutely there is no material specifically made out against accused persons for having committed any of the offences alleged in both the Crime Nos.453/2022 and 454/2022 registered by the CEN police and charge sheeted. Therefore, I am of the view, the criminal proceedings against these petitioners/accused persons requires to be quashed.

¶76

Accordingly, both Crl.P.No.8975/2022 and Crl.P.No.8708/2022 are allowed.

¶77

Consequently, the criminal proceedings against petitioners/accused Nos.1, 8 and 16 in C.C.No.29575/2022 pending on the file of I ACMM, Bengaluru, registered by Whitefield CEN police in Crime No.453/2022 and in Crime No.454/2022 registered by the Whitefield CEN police against accused Nos.1, 7, 6 and 11 are hereby quashed."

¶78

In the light of the issues answered by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court supra standing covered to the case at hand on all its fours, the criminal petition stands disposed on the very same findings and observations.

¶79