JUDGMENT

Vikas Bahl, J. (Oral). - Present petition has been filed by accused no.1 under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'Cr.P.C.') for quashing of FIR bearing No.452 dated 14.11.2021, registered under Section 420 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860 (hereinafter referred to as 'IPC'), at Police Station Civil Lines, Sirsa, Haryana.

This judgment has been divided into the following sections: -

Background of the Case:

2. The background of the case is that the above said FIR was registered on the complaint of respondent No.2-Poonam Gautam against five accused persons including the present petitioner, on the allegations that respondent No.2 had a wholesale Patanjli shop, number of which is DSS-50, HUDA Complex, old bus stand, near town park, Sirsa, District Sirsa and her business was running well when, accused No.1 had stated that M/s PC Jewellers had no showroom at Sirsa and in case, respondent No.2 were to act on their advice, then she will be able to earn more money than what she was earning from her old business and she will be able to earn a minimum of Rs.50,000 per month and in case, the respondent No.2 helps the company in selling the company items, then she would get commission of @ 2% on gold jewellery, 1% on coins and 5% on diamond and would earn an income of about Rs.4 to 5 lakhs per month from the said percentage commission. After the said assurance, respondent No.2 was informed that she would have to design her shop according to their architect Devender Gupta, for the purpose of sale of jewellery and she will have to pay fee to the said Devender Gupta. It is further alleged that the papers were received by the complainant- respondent No.2 from the said Devender Gupta and thereafter, she spent an amount of Rs.95,60,000/- in renovating her shop which included expenses on account of installation of false ceiling in the shop, wallpapers, lights/electrification expenses, high standard wooden furniture, toughened glass, looking mirror including fittings, 82 KV Generator set, one split AC, Somany company tiles, granite and marvel, high tech CCTV cameras, five computers with hardware, iron racks for the employees etc. It is further alleged that an amount of Rs.2,76,000/- was also paid to the architect Devender Gupta and that the entire work was done on the advice of the said architect, who was sent by the accused no.1. During the said period, respondent No.2 had shifted the Patanjli shop to the basement on which also a lot of money was spent and on account of the said shifting, there was loss of business. It is fu