JUDGMENT :

SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, J.

1. Heard Mr. A.K. Das, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Mr. Rupesh Singh, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Opposite Party No. 2.

2. This petition has been heard through Video Conferencing in view of the guidelines of the High Court taking into account the situation arising due to COVID-19 pandemic. None of the parties have complained about any technical snag of audio-video and with their consent this matter has been heard.

3. The petitioners have filed this petition for quashing the entire criminal proceeding and orders dated 18.08.2015 and 31.08.2015 in connection with Sonari P.S. Case No. 50 of 2015, G.R. No. 923 of 2015, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Jamshedpur, whereby warrant of arrest and process under section 82 Cr.P.C. I.A. No. 6911 of 2015 was filed for challenging the order dated 28.11.2015 whereby process under Section 83 Cr.P.C. has been issued against the petitioners. The said I.A. was allowed by order dated 27.01.2016 and the said I.A was directed to be treated as a part of the main application. All these orders have been challenged by the petitioners.

4. The complaint was filed stating therein that:

“The husband of the complainant was employee of Tata Steel Ltd. retired from service in the month of February, 2015. The complainant/informant alleged that Indrajeet Kaur @ Monalisha run a beauty parlour in the name and style of Monalisha Beauty Parlour, she further alleged that she used to visit occasionally at beauty parlour therefore complainant and Monalisha became friend. She further alleged that Birendra Kashyap who is husband of Monalisha also used to come at Beauty Parlour where both wife and husband learnt that two sons of the complainant are residing abroad and they are earning handsome salary. It is further alleged that once husband of Monalisha told the complainant, he runs an investment consultant and deals in shares, debentures and mutual funds. She further alleged that both the accused persons came to the house of the complainant some times in the month of October, 2012 and that time complainant and her husband both were present at home, she further alleged that both the accused persons narrated before them that they were not successfully run the beauty parlour only but also run the investment consultancy for which their other clients are receiving handsome returns and both the accused persons assured to them that they would also get return minimum 14% on the investment made by them. She further alleged, initially she invested Rs. 5,00,000/- (Five lacs) in mutual funds and shares through accused person. She further alleged that she invested Rs. 69,00,000/- (Sixty nine lacs) through accused person in the month of November, 2012 to December, 2015. She further alleged that whenever the husband of he complainant asked the accused person to give the share certificates, debentures certificates and also mutual funds certificates, they always kept saying that they are not in physical shape but have been put in DMAT account of investment firm and also assured the complainant that her money is absolutely safe and investments made by her is fetching very good returns and has approximately touched nearly Rs. 90,00,000/- (Ninety lacs). She further alleged that when the husband of the complainant retired on 1st February, 2015 and thereafter complainant needed money she went to the accused no. 1 and demanded money upon which accused no. 1 flatly refused to return the amount and told she is a BJP leader holding a high position within the party and she has got top level connection with the police and threaten to the complainant to not asked regarding certificate and amount. She further alleged that accused no. 2 gave to cheques on 20.02.2015 in favour of complainant and her husband amounting Rs. 65,000/- (sixty five thousand) and when the cheques were deposited, the cheques returned with endorsement that the accou