LAWS(MPH)-2012-9-228

ABHIBARAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

Decided On September 14, 2012
ABHIBARAN SINGH Appellant
V/S
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE applicant has filed this petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashment of the FIR, dated 28-05-2011.

(2.) ON the basis of the aforesaid FIR, offences vide Crime No.255/2011 at police station Goke Ka Mandir, Gwalior under Section 420 of IPC, under Section 45-S/58-B(5-A) of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 and also under Section 3(1)(2)(4) of the Madhya Pradesh Nikshepakon Ke Hiton Ka Sanrakshan Adhiniyam, 2000, have been registered against the applicant and other Board of Directors and Officers of the Company, named as "Parivar Dairies and Allied Limited". It is mentioned in the FIR that the company ''Parivar Dairies and Allied Limited'' was registered under the provisions of Companies Act, 1956 on 31-10-2002. It had been doing the business for the last nine years. The Company had mentioned in its official communication that it was in the business of purchasing and selling of cattles; and other diary products. However, the Company was in the business of receiving money from the public with a promise to pay the money back with higher interest. For the aforesaid purpose, the Company offered higher interest. The Company played fraud with the public and for the aforesaid purpose, the Company did not follow the provisions of Madhya Pradesh Nikshepakon Ke Hiton Ka Sanrakshan Adhiniyam, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act of 2000') and also the Company had not taken any permission from the Reserve Bank of India or Security Exchange Board of India. The Company engaged various agents for the purpose of receiving money from the public.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the applicant has submitted that on the basis of the FIR, no offence is made out against the Company and earlier the Chief Judicial Magistrate vide order dated 5th July, 2011 acquitted the applicant from the offences, hence, on the same ground second FIR could not be registered against the applicant. In support of his contentions, learned counsel for the applicant relied on the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of T.T. Antony Vs. State of Kerala and Others, reported in (2001) 6 SCC 181.