Prayag Infotech Hi Rise Ltd. and Prayag Infotech Network Pvt. Ltd. and Basudeb Bagchi and Avik Bagchi V. Union of India through its Superintendent of Police, C.B.I., E.O.W., Ranchi

Cr.M.P./2895/2019

AI Insights

The case involves M/s Prayag Infotech Hi Rise Ltd. and M/s Prayag Infotech Network Pvt. Ltd., along with their directors, Basudeb Bagchi and Avik Bagchi, who were accused of defrauding the public by misappropriating funds collected under the guise of legitimate business operations. The petitioners sought to quash the criminal proceedings against them, arguing that they had operated within legal bounds, responded to SEBI notices, and refunded substantial amounts to investors. However, the CBI presented evidence of a criminal conspiracy and misappropriation of funds, leading the court to dismiss the petitioners' application.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 800034 (HC-JHARKHAND)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 04-03-2025
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: IPC, Prize, Chits and Money Circulation (Banning) Act, 1978, F.B.I. Act, 1934
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: ANIL KUMAR; CHANDANA KUMARI; SWAPNIL
• Assessee Lawyers: AYUSH
• Keywords: Criminal conspiracy; Misappropriation; Quashing of criminal proceedings; Defrauding the general public; Investors duped
• Section: 6; 3; 45-S; 420; 120B

Judgement Text

" IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No. 2895 of 2019 1. M/s Prayag Infotech Hi Rise Ltd. through its Director Basudeb Bagchi, son of late Nirendra Nath Bagchi having registered office at P-45, Bhupen Roy Road, Behala, P.O. & P.S. Behala, Kolkata-34 2. M/s Prayag Infotech Network Pvt. Ltd. through its Director Avik Bagchi, son of Sri Basudeb Bagchi, having registered office at P-45, Bhupen Roy Road, Behala, P.O. & P.S. Behala, Kolkata-34. 3. Basudeb Bagchi, son of late Nirendra Nath Bagchi, Resident of 139/C/21/1, Becharam Chatterjee Road, P.O. Behala, P.S. Parnasree Kolkata-34 (West Bengal) 4. Avik Bagchi, Aged about 35 years, son of Sri Basudeb Bagchi, Resident of 139/C/21/1, Becharam Chatterjee Road, P.O. Behala, P.S. Parnasree Kolkata-34 (West Bengal) ... Petitioners Vs. Union of India through its Superintendent of Police, C.B.I., E.O.W., Ranchi. .... Opposite Parties --- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY --- For the Petitioners : Mr. Ayush, Advocate For the CBI : Mr. Anil Kumar, (Sr. Advocate) ASGI Ms. Chandana Kumari, AC to ASGI Mr. Swapnil, AC to ASGI --- Order No. 07 Dated 04th March, 2025 Heard the learned counsel for the respective sides. In this application the petitioners have prayed for quashing of the entire criminal proceedings in connection with RC 093201750006 registered u/s 420 r/w Section 120B of the I.P.C. and u/s 3/6 of the Prize, Chits and Money Circulation (Banning) Act, 1978 as well as Section 45(S) of F.B.I. Act, 1934, pending in the Court of learned Special Judge, CBI-cum-Special Judge, PMPLA at Ranchi. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners No. 3 and 4 were merely the Directors of M/s Prayag Infotech Hi Rise Ltd. and M/s Prayag Infotech Network Pvt. Ltd. and no documentary proof has been collected in course of investigation to suggest about the involvement of the petitioners in defrauding the general public. It has further been submitted that the business of the companies runs across several States and in order to extend the facilities to the investors as per the scheme of the companies, branches were opened at various places. The companies had also replied to various notices issued by the SEBI (Securities Exchange Board of India) and in course of hearing, it has also been submitted that the companies have refunded a substantial amount and the issues raised though the SEBI in its interim order had barred the companies and the Directors from selling assets raised through preferential shares. Learned counsel adds that even the income tax amount was duly paid and the balance sheet would indicate the profit and loss of the company. It has therefore been submitted that since the petitioners were running their business in a legal fashion, the First Information Report instituted against the petitioners deserves to be quashed and set aside. Mr. Anil Kumar, learned ASGI, appearing for the CBI has submitted that in course of investigation it has come to light that the petitioners No. 1 and 2 company along with their Directors who have been arrayed as petitioners No. 3 and 4 in this application had duped gullible investors and had defrauded the general public which fact has been noted in the charge sheet submitted against the petitioners. It appears that in course of investigation, it has come that the petitioner companies along with their Directors had entered into a criminal conspiracy and by projecting the companies of carrying on legitimate business with a prospect of higher returns, collected a huge amount which were subsequently misappropriated by diverting the money to the sister company as well as withdrawing a huge amount towards the Directors’ salary. The amount of misappropriation caused by the act of the petitioners is specifically mentioned at Para-16.54 of the charge sheet. The investigation has therefore categorically come to a conclusion about the involvement of the petitioners in collecting a huge amount from the market by giving a rosy picture of the business of the company and the investors having been duped and the huge misappropriation having been caused by the petitioners, I am not inclined to accede to the prayer of the petitioners for quashing of the criminal proceedings instituted against them. On the basis of the reasonings aforesaid, this application stands dismissed. Pending I.A., if any, stands closed. MK (RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY,J.) Page|2 "