- (1.) The petitioners have filed the present Civil Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 487 Cr. P. C. for quashing the FIR No. 222 dated 13.6.2001 registered under Sections 468/471/420/120-B of Indian Penal Code, in Police Station, Behala Kolkata and to issue a writ of prohibition to respondent No. 3 and 4 from taking any further steps in respect of the impugned FIR or in the alternative a writ of mandamus may be issued directing the State of West Bengal to transfer the investigation being conducted by the West Bengal Police in the impugned FIR or any other connected FIR/FIRs. to Punjab/U. T. Chandigarh Police as the cause of action leading to impugned FIR has largely arisen in U. T. Chandigarh/Punjab:
(2.) Some facts can be noticed in the following manner. One Govinda Lal Bhattacharjee resident of Pashupati Bhattacharjee Road, P. S. Behala Kolkata submitted an application to the Inspector in-charge, Behala P. S. South 24 Parganas and requested him for the registration of the case. The contents of the complaint are as follows: "I do hereby lodge complaint against Mr. K. D. Singh Chairman & Managing Director Toubro Infotech & Industries having his office at SCO 12-13 Madhya Marg Sector 9D, Chandigarh and its Regional Office at 156-A, Lenin Sarani Suite No. 501 & 507 (5th floor) Kamalalaya Centre, Calcutta 13(2) Mr. S. L. Baluja Director of DO (3) Mr. Sergio Corene, Director of DO (4) Mr. Ravinder Singh, Executive Director of DO (5) Major Gurjeet Sirjeet Singh (Retd. ) Director of DO (6) Mr. Nishant Parkash, Regional Manager of DO East Calcutta at 156-A Keshub Sarani Suite No. 501 and 507 (Fifth Floor) Kamalalaya Centre Calcutta 13(7), Mr. Amal Kumar Das, office bearer of do at Calcutta Regional Office (8) Mr. Bimal Kumar Das of do (9) Mr. lndrajeet Roy of do (10) Mr. Pranab Kundu Team Leader of Agents of do (11) Mr. Bhabesh Chandra Mazumder of do (12) Prabir Majumder of do (13) Mr. Pradeep Chakraborty of do (14) Mr. Meloy Sarkar of do. (15) Mr. Pradeep Pal of do (16) Mr. Jehury Sakhukhan of do (17) Mr. Prasun Kundu of do and others to the effect that one Shri Sumen Bhattacharjee, husband of my younger sister-in-law came to my residence along with Shri Jehury Sadhukan and Pardip Pal in August 2000 and stated to me that he had invested cash Rs. 30,000.00 towards purchase of secured Redeemable Debentures issued by Tubro Infotech and Industries Ltd. having its head office at SCO 12-13 Sector 9D Chandigarh and Regional Office at 156-A Lenin Sarani Suite No. 501 and 507 (Fifth Floor) Kamalalaya Centre, Calcutta 13 on the condition that said invested amount will be doubled after 4 years and 8 months. I was allured with the said purpose on seeking some papers, booklets issued by that company. They also brought application forms for investment of cash towards secured Redeemable Debentures on 10th August 2000 I paid cash Rs. 5000.00 for 4 years 11 months to Suman Bhattacherjee and others two who accompanied him, filled up the application form and I signed the forms. They issued Kachha Receipt Term. Again as 9th March 2001 they came to my residence and I handed over Rs. I lakh to Pradip Pal and the forms were filled up by Johuri Sadhukhan (4 application forms) and I signed on forms of Rs. 25000.00 each. My wife also signed on those forms. Name of my wife is Rinku Bhattacharya. It may be mentioned that the first Certificate of Secured redeemable Debenture for Rs. 5000.00 along with a post- dated cheque was handed over to me on last part of September 2000 and other four certificates with post-dated cheques was given to me on last part of May 2001. It may also be mentioned that they met me on several occasions and incited me to invest more money. On scrutiny of documents issued by the said company, subsequently, I found following false and misleading statements: 1. That documents prominently state that the return of the Debentures were tax free, but I have come to know that it was a false statement. 2. That the documents state that the secured Debenture issued by the company were assigned credit rating by its Bankers. The said statement fraudulent inducement to allure the investors as leasut from the SEBI. 3. That I had been to the office SEBI of Forture Building (Fifth Floor) Room No. A-16, 234/34 A. J. C. Bose Calcutta 20 and came to learn that the said company has issued Debentures without having any permission from SEBI which is mandatory on the part of a company issuing shares and Debentures. 4. That the document states it was a private placement issue of secure Redeemable Debentures but it is found that there is being issued public engaging commission agent throughout the State of West Bengal and also in other States. 5. That the documents disclosed the date of issue of Debentures terminates on 31.12.2000 but they had taken cash from me of Rs. 1 Lakh for investment towards Debentures in March 2001 and given back dated certificates. Now, I realised that the above persons of the company and others have manufacture documents containing false and misleading statements and thereby allured investors by fraudulent inducements and defrauded investors of their investment for their wrongful gain. In this way I have also been cheated in respect of cash Rs. 1,05,000.00/- by them. I would therefore request you, to register a case against them and to take necessary steps towards investigation". On the basis of this complaint, which was received by the police on 13.6.2001, FIR No. 222 dated 13.6.2001 was registered under Sections 468/471/420/120-B of the Indian Penal Code and on the basis of that FIR the police started the investigation. Apprehending his arrest, petitioner No. 2 on behalf of petitioner No. 1 has filed the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 Cr. P. C. firstly for the quashment of the FIR, secondly for the transfer of the investigation and thirdly it was prayed that during the pendency of the writ petition further proceedings before the Kolkata Police may be stayed.
(3.) After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners, we are of the considered opinion that this writ petition deserves to be dismissed in limine on two grounds; firstly that this High Court has no territorial jurisdiction to entertain the present writ petition as in our considered opinion no cause of action has arisen within the jurisdiction of States of Punjab, Haryana or U. T. Chandigarh. At this juncture, we are guided by the allegations of the complaint and from those allegations we are prima facie of the opinion that a case under Sections 468, 471, 420 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code is made out and the cause of action arose to the complainant at Kolkata.;