Five persons connected to Expertrons Technologies sought quashing of an FIR alleging they induced a franchise partner to pay Rs.7,85,000 by false promises. The court found the complainant had not discharged his contractual obligations and that a concluded enforceable contract cannot be given criminal colour; the FIR was quashed as a civil dispute.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Crl.O.P.No.4559 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 09.07.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN
Crl.O.P.No.4559 of 2023
& Crl.M.P.No.2877 of 2023
1. Mr.Vivek Gupta,
2. Mr.Jatin Solanki,
3. Mrs.Richa Bhadra,
4. Mr.Krishik Nair,
5. Mr.Aditya Mookulmarathur,
... Petitioners/Accused
/versus/
1. The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by the Sub Inspector of Police, Velachery Police Station, Chennai – 600 042.
2. Mrs.Krisha Liji. A ... Respondents/Defacto complainant
Prayer: Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to call for the records and quash the FIR registered in Crime No.585/2022, dated 14.12.2022 as against the petitioners, pending investigation on the file of the 1 st respondent police.
For Petitioner : Mr.Subhang P.Nair
For R1 : Mr.S.Udaya Kumar. Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For R2 : Mrs.Vidya Devarajan
1/7
Crl.O.P.No.4559 of 2023
O R D E R
This petition is filed to quash the F.I.R in Crime No.585 of 2022
pending investigation on the file of the Velachery Police Station.
2 . The content of the F.I.R given by one Mr.A.Krisha Liji is that,
the petitioner's Company by name Expertrons Technologies Pvt Ltd using sugar coated word cheated him and his mother to the tune of Rs.7,85,000/- promising a lucrative returns to them in the business module propagated by them. The business proposal which induced the complainant is that if he invest a sum of Rs.11,80,000/- and become a Diamond Franchise partner of the accused Company, he will be getting 100% returns on his investment within three months. They made him to raise student loans under very high interest rate of 20.14% and induced him to sign up the Diamond Franchise and thereby, he had suffered loss of Rs.7,85,000/-.
3 . The Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioners herein are persons responsible for the conduct of the business run by the Company called Expertrons Technologies Pvt Ltd. A unique mode of business module wherein the products were marketed through the Channel
Crl.O.P.No.4559 of 2023
Partners for which they will be getting Commission. For the said purpose, the Channel Partners have to undergo marketing training as well as they were assured of reimbursement of their expenses towards advertisements upto 15% of their investment.
4 . Having agreed to the terms and conditions, the complainant did
not not paid the full partnership fees of Rs.11,80,000/-. He had paid only Rs.7,85,000/- in instalments. He did not participate in the training Session nor spent money for advertisements to capture customers. Having failed to discharge his part of terms of contract, had lodged a false complaint as if, the petitioners have cheated him by making sugar coated words.
5. The Learned Counsel appearing for the defacto complainant
submitted that the entire promise made by the petitioners on behalf of the Company was shallow and empty promise and tall claims without any substantial backing of truth. There are several complaints against these petitioners for cheating and their module is a non-starter.
6 . The Learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent
submitted that apart from this complaint, the investigation indicates that two https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 3/7
Crl.O.P.No.4559 of 2023
other complaints were registered one at Chitlapakkam Police Station and another in Bangalore but information indicates that both the complaints were settled.
7 . On perusing the communication between the complainant and
the petitioners Company, the terms of agreement entered between them for Channel partners as well as the tenure of the complainant, this Court find that for the grant of non-exclusive license to sell and market Expertrons Products provided by Expertrons under the agreement, the complainant and his mother, S.Uma Shankar are supposed to pay the partnership fees of Rs.11,80,000/which are non-refundable. Admittedly, the complainant has not paid the said partnership fees in full. He has paid only Rs.7,85,000/-. This apart, the Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that there is no indication of the complainant acting as per the terms of the contract to ensure the sale of Expertrons products.
8. It appears that the complainant was conceived only by the lucrative returns promised by the petitioners herein but not by the obligation on his part to market the product. The business module as such, whether fake or genuine, could have been tested only if the complainant had attempted to https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 4/7
Crl.O.P.No.4559 of 2023
discharge the terms of the contract. Without discharging his part of contract, a complaint has been lodged as if the petitioners, with predetermination and intentionally conspired together to allure the defacto complainant and induced him to part away the money. Though the ingredient required to attract offences under Sections 406 and 420 of I.P.C been extracted in the complaint, there is no material to support the claim that, dishonestly, the petitioners herein were allured to part away a sum of Rs.7,85,000/-. The terms of the contract are very clear and the offer and acceptance by the parties have concluded an enforceable contract therefore cannot now been given a criminal colour. If there is any beach, it is always open to the parties to work out his remedy before the appropriate Civil Court.
9 . This Court is of the view that civil dispute arising out of contract been given a criminal colour without any substance. Hence, liable to be quashed. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed. The complaint in FIR registered in Crime No.585 of 2022 on the file of the 1 st respondent police stands quashed. Consequently, connected M.P is closed.
09.07.2024
5/7
Crl.O.P.No.4559 of 2023
Index : Yes/No. Neutral Citation : Yes/No. bsm
Copy to:- 1. The Assistant Commissioner of Police, CCB-1, Central Crime Branch, Office of Commissioner of Police, Vepery, Egmore. 2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
6/7
Crl.O.P.No.4559 of 2023
Dr.G.JAYACHANDRAN,J.
bsm
Crl.O.P.No.4559 of 2023
09.07.2024
7/7
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the FIR for cheating and criminal breach of trust over a franchise agreement amounts to a civil dispute wrongly given criminal colour and should be quashed.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Vivek Gupta
Jatin Solanki
Richa Bhadra
Krishik Nair
Aditya Mookulmarathur
State of Tamil Nadu, rep. by the Sub Inspector of Police, Velachery Police Station
G.Jayachandran
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
