THE HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA CRIMINAL PETITION Nos.11229, 11266 and 11270 OF 2025

COMMON ORDER:

Crl.P.No.11229 of 2025 is filed by the petitioners – accused Nos.1 to 3 seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.71 of 2022 on the file of the learned Special Judge for Trial Cases under Economic Offences, CBI Court Complex, Nampally at Hyderabad, registered for the offence under Section 7(6) read with Section 447 of the Companies Act, 2013.

2. Crl.P.No.11266 of 2025 is filed by the petitioners – accused Nos.1 to 3 seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.83 of 2022 on the file of the learned Special Judge for Trial Cases under Economic Offences, CBI Court Complex, Nampally at Hyderabad, registered for the offence under Section 7(6) read with Section 447 of the Companies Act, 2013.

3. Crl.P.No.11270 of 2025 is filed by the petitioners – accused Nos.1 to 3 seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.66 of 2022 on the file of the learned Special Judge for Trial Cases under Economic Offences, CBI Court Complex, Nampally at Hyderabad, registered for the offence under Section 7(6) read with Section 447 of the Companies Act, 2013.

4. Since the petitioners are the accused Nos.1 to 3 in all the petitions, they are heard together and disposed off by way of this common order. Heard the submissions of Sri L.Harish, learned counsel representing Sri Praveen Kumar Challa, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri B.Narasimha Sharma, learned Additional Solicitor General of India for respondent No.2.

5. The learned petitioners counsel has submitted that the allegations do not attract the ingredients of Section 7(6) of the Companies Act, 2013 and that accused Nos.1 and 2 are the directors/officers-in-default of the company, accused No.3 is the Practicing Company Secretary and accused No.4 is the Company. He further submitted that the allegations that the company is not functioning at the given address and that it is not doing any software business as mentioned by it during its registration and that they are conducting fraudulent transactions is all false. He further submitted that none of the victims have given a complaint, therefore question of deceiving anybody does not arise. He further submitted that the said allegations do not point out any offence against the petitioners. He therefore, prayed to quash the proceedings against the petitioners.

6. The learned Additional Solicitor General of India has submitted that the petitioner No.3 herein is the Company Secretary and there is legal foundation for the alleged offences and the prima facie contents of the complaint do attract the offences against the petitioner. He further submitted that by virtue of the Orders of the Government of India, Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA), accused No.4 company was ordered for Inquiry by the Ministry vide its letter dated 03.09.2021 to inquire into the sustained involvement of Chinese Nationals in fraudulent and money laundering activities through companies registered in India. An Inquiry Officer was appointed to visit the registered office of these companies and in the instant case, one such company being the A4 company has been incorporated with the involvement of Chinese Nationals who were operating fake websites and using telegram app to defraud innocent victims. It has been reported that they created 12 companies and one such company is the A4 company and instructed locals/Directors to open bank accounts of these fake companies, which were controlled by the Chinese nationals. It was further found on verification that the Practicing Company Secretary (PCS) has certified the location of registered office of the company showing at a place mentioned against the name of their company respectively. He further certified and signed the incorporation documents (SPICE), DIN application, situation of registered office submitted through online MCA portal by stating that “any false or incorrect particulars of any information or suppression of any material