BRIJ MOHAN VASISHTA Vs. DEEPAK MELWANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for petitioner. Learned counsel for respondent seeks time to submit arguments. Prayer rejected. Perused the records.

(2.) Respondent filed a private complaint before the X ACMM, Bengaluru, numbered as PCR.No.51424/2014 (CC.No.55061/ 2014) against three accused persons. Petitioner herein is shown as accused No.1. The material allegation made in the complaint is that the petitioner herein met the complainant and his father about five years ago and informed them that he is the Managing Partner of Trans Asias Biotech which deals with medicines. Accused persons expressed that they had started a new partnership firm and that they were in need of funds to develop their business and induced the complainant and his father to enter into a transaction with them. "The accused persons fraudulently acquired funds and compounded it with a false commitment to repay the amount and also pay good returns on the amount." Accused No.1 also gave his handwritten offer letter seeking funds. Believing the words of accused persons, complainant and his aged father invested a sum of Rs.25 lakhs with accused persons between 28.06.2009 to 12.11.2010. The amounts were received by petitioner/accused No.1 as an investment to their firm for different purposes.

(3.) The further case of the complainant is that on 7.3.2013, accused No.1 personally approached the complainant and gave a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and expressed that he was willing to execute the MOU on a stamp paper. To reach an amicable settlement, the complainant agreed to a much reduced amount as per the MOU given by the accused and in terms thereof, petitioner issued two postdated cheques. Further allegation is that, in order to avoid repayment, the accused persons with a mala fide intention have transferred the properties which stood in their names to their respective wives' names through gift deeds. Finally, it is averred in the complaint that, "12. This entire methodology of the accused persons raising funds from friends and acquaintances promising them good returns at exorbitant rates of interest, that too without doing business in the firm, is a ponzi scheme. There are other people to whom they had approached and taken money from. When these persons ratcheted up the pressure to recover their amounts, the accused persons juggled with the partnership deed and made them a partner in their firm, which has made them also liable to repay the amounts to the complainant. The accused No.1 along with accused no.2 and 3, have connived to borrow big amounts of money, and pass on the debt to their firm. When his scam was unearthed, and complainant demanded his money back, the accused No.1 threatened to do away with his life. When the accused No.1 finally admitted his legal liability, he gave cheques that bounced, and to top it all, in order not to repay the money to the complainant, the accused persons have concurrently and fraudulently transferred their assets, and are now trying to desperately sell the said properties deceitfully. All the accused persons made false representation, took money on behalf of a partnership firm, and have cheated the complainant and his father. Thereby all the accused persons have committed the offence punishable u/s 420 of the IPC".