Inducement to invest based on false assurances establishes liability under the relevant sections for offenses related to cheating.

O R D E R

The accused Nos.6 and 7 in C.C No.852/2019 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Aluva have filed this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C to quash the proceedings against them in the said case. The offence alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 120B and 420 I.P.C r/w Section 34 I.P.C.

2. The prosecution case is that, with the fraudulent and dishonest intention to cheat the de facto complainant/third respondent, the petitioners, who were associated with the company by name ‘Cee Vee Global Trade Solutions Pvt. Ltd’, induced the de facto complainant to believe that if he invested money in the above company remaining under the directorship of accused Nos.1 to 4, high returns of profits would be given, and accordingly, obtained an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- from CW1, Rs.10,00,000/- from CW2, Rs.5,00,000/- from CW3, Rs.3,00,000/- from CW4 and Rs.10,00,000/- from CW5, and thereafter did not give the profit as assured or return the money invested by the above persons.

3. In the present petition, the petitioners would contend that they are totally innocent and that they have been falsely implicated in this case. It is further contended that none of the offences as alleged are attracted in the facts and circumstances of this case.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned counsel for the de facto complainant/third respondent and the learned Public Prosecutor representing the State of Kerala.

5. The prosecution records would primarily show that the complainant and the other witnesses arraigned as CW2 to CW5 invested their hard earned money with the company run by accused Nos.1 to 4 believing the assurance of the petitioners herein that they would be rewarded with high returns of profit for the above investment. The statements of the complainant and other witnesses contain the indication that the petitioners resorted to the above act of inducement upon them with the intention to cheat them. Though it is contended by the petitioners that they were having no control over the management and affairs of the company in which the de facto complainant and the other witnesses made the investments, the case records would show that the petitioners were also associated with the above company, and that the complainant and the other witnesses ventured to invest their money in the said company solely due to the reason that the petitioners induced them to believe that they would be provided with high returns of profit.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioners would contend that the petitioners are not answerable for the failure of the company run by accused Nos.1 to 4 to return the money of the complainant and other witnesses. It is further argued that even the petitioners had instituted legal proceedings against the management of the above said company for defrauding them, and hence they are not liable to be prosecuted for the loss sustained by the complainant and other witnesses due to the amount invested by them in the aforesaid company. It is not possible to accept the above argument of the learned counsel for the petitioners since the prosecution records would reveal that the complainant and the other witnesses happened to invest their money with the aforesaid company only because of the inducement made by the petitioners herein. It is not possible for this Court, in this proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C, to embark upon a detailed analysis of the extent of liability of the petitioners in connection with the aforesaid inducement made by them, which, according to the complainant and CW2 to CW5, was with the dishonest intention to cheat them. All the above aspects are to be dealt with by the Trial Court at the appropriate stage of the pro