Ranjit More - (1.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and the matter is taken up for final hearing.
(2.) The writ petition is filed invoking extraordinary writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "the Cr.PC.") for quashing the FIR bearing CR No.320 of 2016 initially registered with Dadar Police Station at the instance of respondent No.2- complainant for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short "the IPC"). Subsequently, the investigation was transferred to Economic Offences Wing, Unit IX, CB-CID, Mumbai and renumbered as CR.No.71 of 2016.
(3.) The case of the complainant-respondent No.2 as disclosed in the FIR is as follows: Respondent No.2 is the Director/Promoter of the companies by name M/s. Fortune Financial Services (India) Limited and Fortune Credit Capital Limited. Somewhere around July-2013, the petitioners being Promoters, Founders and Directors of Xperitus Insurance Brokers Pvt. Ltd. and Magus Corporate Advisors Pvt. Limited, had approached respondent No.2's company and represented that they are in the business of distribution of insurance products and advisory services in relation to settlement of insurance claims and promised excellent returns on investment and profitability of the Company. After various meetings, the complainant-company decided to purchase 51% shares of M/s. Xperitus Insurance Brokers Pvt. Ltd. and Magus Corporate Advisors Pvt. Ltd. and, accordingly, by the end of the year 2013 invested an amount of Rs.3,00,50,000/- as advance for share purchase and Rs.1,40,00,000/- towards inter-corporate deposit from the accounts of the complainant's company. 16 separate Memorandum of Understanding (MOUs) were entered into by the complainant and different shareholders of the petitioners' company. That in early 2014, the complainant suspected foul play as the petitioners visits to the complainant's company had reduced. There was no communication from the petitioners and after rigorous follow-up, certain details and figures of the petitioners' companies were provided which revealed total mismanagement of the petitioners' companies. This was contrary to the facts and representations made to the complainant. The complainant found that after parting with huge and substantial amounts, the petitioners' company suddenly started making losses. The complainant also found that compliances were not made by the petitioners relating to direct and indirect taxes. The complainant's company thereafter decided not to invest further amount in Xperitus Insurance Brokers Pvt. Ltd. The complainant stopped remaining payment and asked the petitioners to return their money already deposited. The shares of the petitioners' companies were not to be transferred till permission of the IRDA is not obtained. The petitioners had knowledge that the selling of their shares requires IRDA permission. The complainant further wrote a letter to IRDA and in their reply dated 29th July, 2016, they informed that no request has been received from Xperitus Insurance Brokers Limited regarding change in shareholding. In short, it is the case of the complainant that the petitioners by making false representations and suppression of facts had induced the complainant's company to invest an amount of Rs.4,40,50,000/- for purchase of shareholdings of Xperitus Insurance Brokers Pvt. Ltd. and Magus Corporate Advisors Pvt. Ltd. though they were fully aware that their companies were commercially imbalanced.;