SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Ori) 491

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK
S.K. Panigrahi, J.
Prashant Kumar Mohanty - Appellant
Versus
State Of Odisha - Respondent
BLAPL No. 6580 of 2020
Decided On : 10-03-2021

Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Gautam Mukherji, Senior Advocate, and M/s. Partha Mukherji, A.C. Panda, S.D.Ray, S. Sahoo, S. Priyadarshini and S. Das, for the Appellant; Mr. Bibekananda Bhuyan, Advocate, for Opid:M/s. Aswini Kumar Mishra-3, Sarat Chandra Mishra and Kailash Chandra Mishra, for the Respondent.

The main legal point established in the judgment is the consideration of parity with other accused persons granted bail by the Supreme Court in similar cases, and the interpretation of the legal provisions related to financial schemes and criminal offenses.

Headnote:

Criminal Procedure Code - Bail Application - Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code along with Sections 4, 5, and 6 of the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978 read with Section 6 of the Odisha Protection of Interests of Depositors (in Financial Establishment) Act, 2011

Fact of the Case:

The case involves a bail application under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 in connection with alleged offences under various sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978, and the Odisha Protection of Interests of Depositors (in Financial Establishment) Act, 2011. The petitioner, an independent representative of a company, was accused of involvement in a financial scheme.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the petitioner deserved to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity with other accused persons who had been granted bail by the Supreme Court in similar cases. The court directed the petitioner to be released on bail in connection with the case, subject to terms and conditions deemed just and proper.

Issues: The issues involved in the case included the nature of the business model of the company, compliance with direct selling guidelines, and the interpretation of the legal provisions related to financial schemes and criminal offenses.

Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the Supreme Court's grant of bail to other accused persons in similar cases, the nature of the business model of the company, and the interpretation of the legal provisions related to financial schemes and criminal offenses.

Final Decision: The court directed the petitioner to be released on bail in connection with the case, subject to terms and conditions deemed just and proper.

JUDGMENT

1. The present application is preferred under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 in connection with EOW Bhubaneswar P.S. Case No.17 of 2019 corresponding to C.T. Case No.8 of 2019, pending in the court of the learned Presiding Officer, Designated Court under the O.P.I.D. Act, Cuttack, for alleged offences under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code along with Sections 4, 5, and 6 of the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978 read with Section 6 of the Odisha Protection of Interests of Depositors (in Financial Establishment) Act, 2011.

2. The succinct facts of the case are that Q Net Limited is a Company incorporated for more than 17 years in Hong Kong and it is operating in more than 150 countries. It deals in as many as 80 products, including education, holiday packages, personal care, nutrition, cosmetics, home care etc. It allegedly has six million customers worldwide and about 3 lakh members in India. It's Indian subsidiary is Vihaan Direct Selling India Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the 'Company'). The Products marketed by the Company are subjected to stringent quality checks and have 30 days' return policy. A customer willing to supplement his income has the option of enrolling as an 'independent representative'. Both the Petitioner herein and the informant were enrolled as such independent representatives.

3. The said Company has a Refund Policy which prescribes that if there is a customer/Independent Representative, that has purchased a product and if he/she is not satisfied with the product, he is free to return the product within 30 days from the date of purchase of the goods. In addition, each and every registered Independent Representative is free to opt out or cancel his registration within thirty days from registration, in case he feels that he is unable to commit his time towards the business.

4. The relationship between an Independent Representative and the Company is wholly governed by the registration form and declaration form signed by the Independent Representative and is binding on both the Company as well as the Independent Representative. The products were offered for sale by the Company through it's web portal www.qnetindia.in and payments are accepted only through electronic mode. On receipt of payment, the Company raises a purchase order to one Transview and procures the product from it. On receipt of purchase order, the said Transview then supplies the products to the Company which in turn delivers to the customers at the delivery address provided by the customers at the time of purchase. On receipt of a product, if the customer is not satisfied with the product, then he is entitled to return the said product to the Company by raising a request for exchange within seven days from receipt of the product. The customer is also entitled to raise a request for refund of money within a period of thirty days from receipt of product. On the conclusion of a sale, the commission from the sale is credited to the account of the Independent Representative. The commission is arrived at through algorithmic calculations and paid out to the Independent Representative after TDS deductions. The compensation plan is part and parcel of the Policy and Procedure of the Company which is available on the website.

5. The independent representatives before their enrolment as independent representatives, are allegedly required to sign a declaration which provides for as follows:

"I acknowledge that QNET's business is not a 'get-rich-quick scheme' and there is no guarantee or promise that an Independent Representative (including me) will make a certain level of income. Such things will differ to each individual since there is a strong connection to a person's personal efforts, diligence, dedication, motivation and personal skills.

I have purchased a product/service of QNET for my personal usage and not for resale. Purchasing this product does not guarantee

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top