MANMOHAN SINGH, J.

1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of complaint i.e. CC No. 880/1 titled as “Enforcement Directorate vs. Sanjay Malviya & Ors.” and the summoning order dated 27th May, 2002 passed by the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate under Section 56 of Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (FERA) read with Section 49 (3) and (4) of Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 (FEMA) in view of judgment dated 21st April, 2009 passed by this Court in Writ Petition (Crl.) No.800/2002 titled as Devashis Bhattarcharya vs. Union of India, 159 (2009) DLT 780.

2. Brief facts of the case are that Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd (MTNL) filed a complaint with Special Cell, Lodhi Road, Delhi Police on 3rd May, 2000 alleging that Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN) connection was given to 12 subscribers each at business premises of the companies at E-380 Greater Kailash, New Delhi to petitioner’s company M/s Intergroup C& E Ltd. and another company at M-70 Greater Kailash belonging to co-accused Shri Arindam Ganguly.

3. The modus operandi as alleged by MTNL in the complaint was that one ISDN line was made a permanent channel at each of the above premises and thereafter by using sophisticated equipment international calls were being distributed to Delhi & nearby areas illegally through PSTN (Public Switch Telephone Network). One ISDN line has a bandwidth of 144 Kbps and this bandwidth was misused to make about 24 voice calls in one single ISDN call, which caused loss equivalent to the charges for 22 lSD calls to the Govt. of India in terms of foreign exchange. It was averred that the above mentioned act resulted in loss of approx. Rs.5 crore to Govt. of India in foreign exchange

4. On the basis of complaint FIR No.136/2000 under Section 420/120 B IPC was registered at P.S. Greater Kailash, New Delhi and on the basis of the allegations, the police collected evidence in the case above.

5. Thereafter, as it is alleged by the petitioner, the respondent in a hast manner filed a Criminal Complaint No. 880/1 dated 27th May, 2002 under Section 56 of the FERA read with Section 49 (3) & (4) of the FEMA before the Court of ACMM as initiation of prosecution under FERA was going to lapse on 31st May, 2002 due to the sun set clause incorporated in FEMA for violation of Section 16(1)(b), 4, 7, 29(1)(a) read with Section 64(2) & 68 of the FERA against the petitioner being one of the Director of Company namely M/s. Intergroup C & E Ltd. and other accused persons namely Devashish Bhattacharya, Deepak Gupta, and Arindam Ganguly, on the same set of facts and evidence collected and filed by the police.

6. The ACMM vide order dated 27th May, 2002 took cognizance of the offence under Section 56 of the FERA and summoned the accused. The present petition is filed assailing the summoning order dated 27th May, 2002 passed by the Trial Court.

7. The Metropolitan Magistrate trying the offence under Section 406/420/120B IPC in the Case FIR No. 136/2000 by order dated 24th July, 2004 held that there is no sufficient material on record to make out offence under Section 406/420/120B IPC against the petitioner and other co-accused and consequently discharged the petitioner and other co-accused for the said offences and only framed charges under Section 4 of Indian Telegraph Act, 1885.

8. It is stated that Devashish Bhattacharya, one of the co-accused in the abovementioned complaint case in similar facts to the present case filed a writ petition being W.P. (Crl.) No. 800/2002 before the Single Judge of this Court which was allowed and the proceeding arising out of Complaint case No. 880/1 dated 27th May, 2002 was quashed vide judgment dated 21st April, 2009.

9. Feeling aggrieved by the judgment dated 21st April, 2009, the respondent filed L.P.A. No. 638/2009 before the Division Bench of this Court which was dismissed vide judgment dated 21st November, 2011. No SLP was preferred by the respondent