Madhya Pradesh High Court
Piyush Chopra vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 5 April, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION NO.2025:MPHC-IND:9177 1 MCRC No.10997/2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DUPPALA VENKATA RAMANA
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No.10997 of 2025
PIYUSH CHOPRA
...Petitioner
and
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ANOTHER
...Respondents
Reserved on 27.03.2025
Pronounced on 05.04.2025
Appearance:
Shri Shantanu Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner /
accused.
Shri Aproov Joshi, learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent
No.1 / State.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ORDER
This Criminal Petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 (for short “Cr.P.C.”) / 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) is filed seeking to quash of
proceedings in Sessions Trial Case No.41/2025 on the file of learned
District and Session Judge, Ujjain.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ANUSHREE
PANDEY
Signing time: 05-04-2025
15:14:41
NEUTRAL CITATION NO.2025:MPHC-IND:9177 2 MCRC No.10997/2025
02. The petitioner in the above Sessions Trial Case No.41/2025 on the
file of learned District and Session Judge, Ujjain.
03. Heard Shri Shantanu Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner and
Shri Apoorv Joshi, learned Public Prosecutor for the State.
04. The facts of this case, in brief, are that : Shri S.I. Pratik Yadav,
Cyber Cell, Ujjain is the de facto complainant presented the report
bearing No.Q/2024 dated 14.06.2024 to the Office of Deputy
Superintendent of Police, Crime Branch, Ujjain, which was entered in
arrival No.1416 of 2024 of the incoming and outgoing register of Police
Station, Neelganga, Ujjain dated 14.06.2024. Further stated that as per the
information received from the informer, on 13.06.2024 one Piyush
Chopra, a resident of Musaddipura Police Station Barakuna, Ujjain is
operating cricket betting on the large scale situated on the first floor of his
duplex house bearing H.No.18 located in 19, Dreams Colony, the
petitioner (Piyush Chopra) is operating betting by keeping many people in
his house and on the basis of fake documents, by taking fake sim cards in
different names, they are placing bets from those numbers in view of the
match between Bangladesh and Netherlands in the T-20 World Cup,
2024. On receipt of information, the Inspector of Police secured the
presence of Kapil Sehgal and Gulshan Chaudhary as Panchas and Pratik
Yadav, S.I. of Police along with team of Cyber Cell, Ujjain and Crime
Branch reached the house of petitioner (Piyush Chopra) and conducted
raid. They have found 09 persons on the first floor, they are working on
computers, laptops and mobiles. The team ascertained their names and
found that they are working on laptops and took them to custody and they
have told that all are jointly placing bets ongoing Bangladesh and
Netherlands T-20 World Cup, 2024. This betting is being run by
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ANUSHREE
PANDEY
Signing time: 05-04-2025
15:14:41
NEUTRAL CITATION NO.2025:MPHC-IND:9177 3 MCRC No.10997/2025
petitioner (Piyush Chopra), he has paid the salary to them, they are
placing bets on win or loss on website named LONDONEXCH9.COM on
the monitor and the laptop screen. The names of bookies are visible on the
screen in codewords BA, SU, MP, PAUL etc., they were arrested and
panchnama was prepared on the spot in the presence of panchas after
confirmation of online betting. They have seized many electronics items
like pen-drives, iphones, other mobiles, sim cards and cash and the
seizure report / panchnama was prepared on the spot and ascertained the
names of the persons, who are take them to the custody and mentioned
their names in the panchnama, they were arrested as per arrest-cheet
before panchas. While inquiry, they have stated that the entire set up for
running the betting was established by petitioner (Piyush Chopra), he
provided all the mobile phones, sim cards and systems etc., they do not
know on whose names the sim cards were issued. The memorandum of
statement was duly made under Section 27 of Indian Evidence Act and
seized huge amount of cash and other electronic items from them. The
petitioner / accused fled away from his house. After seizure proceedings,
persons namely Rohit Singh, Gurpeet Singh, Mayur Jain, Satpreet Singh,
Akash Masihi, Chetan Negi, Harish Teli and Gaurav Jain arrested
separately, brought them to Police Station Neelganga, Ujjain handed over
to HCM PR 74 Birendra Dubey and kept in Maalkhana for safe custody
and registered the panchnama as FIR in Crime No.248/2024 dated
14.06.2024 for the offences punishable Section 419, 420, 467, 468, 109
and 120-B of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short “IPC“), Section 3/4
Public Gambling (Madhya Pradesh) Act, 1976 and Section 66-D of
Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008 and affected them for
arrest and sent them for remand. Tarun Kureel (Officiating Inspector),
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ANUSHREE
PANDEY
Signing time: 05-04-2025
15:14:41
NEUTRAL CITATION NO.2025:MPHC-IND:9177 4 MCRC No.10997/2025
investigated the case and forwarded the charge-sheet to Vivek Kanodia,
who is the investigating Officer / Inspector. He examined the witnesses
and found that the sim cards, which were used by them in fake names on
the basis of fake documents and several mobile phones with sim cards of
different numbers were seized on the spot. It appears prime facie case that
they were being used fraudulently on the basis of fake documents,
keeping in view of the above circumstances, Sections 419, 420, 467 and
468 of IPC were included in the action taken report. The petitioner /
accused (Piyush Chopra) was absconding from the spot. The police team
while searching with due procedure, seized huge amount of cash,
international currency, silver bars, Laptop Minimac and CPU and total
cash of Rs.14,58,67,000/-. Further stated that there was hawala
transaction under the criminal conspiracy while doing hawala business at
international level. Prima facie, involvement of all the accused is a visible
and Section 120-B of IPC is included against the accused. During the
course of the investigation, Abhay Chopra was arrested on 03.08.2024.
On interrogation, he informed that software i.e. Horse software used for
keeping accounts of betting business was given to him by Sanjay
Agrawal, a resident of Indore and Abhay Chopra supplied the said
software to various betting business men. The investigation further
reveals that information about Abhay Chopra has been obtained from the
whatsapp company. Accordingly, mobile phone and laptop were seized
from the him. Sanjay Agrawal has absconded. After completion of
investigation, final report, spot map and seizure proceedings filed, the
crime was investigated and eventually having found prime facie evidence
against all the accused including petitioner (Piyush) herein regarding their
complicity in commission of said offences, the investigating officer has
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ANUSHREE
PANDEY
Signing time: 05-04-2025
15:14:41
NEUTRAL CITATION NO.2025:MPHC-IND:9177 5 MCRC No.10997/2025
filed charge-sheet after obtaining permission of Superintendent of Police
on 17.12.2024 vide Challan No.433/2024 for the offences under Section
419, 420, 467, 468, 109 and 120-B of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short
“IPC“), Section 3/4 Public Gambling (Madhya Pradesh) Act, 1976 and
Section 66-D of Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008. The
said case was now pending before the learned District and Sessions Judge,
Ujjain vide S.T. No.41/2025 for trial.
05. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there was no
specific allegations made against the petitioner / accused that he is the
person running betting in House No.18 by supplying the sim cards and
cell phones in connection with the match between Bangladesh and
Neatherlands T-20 World Cup, 2024. Further submitted that there being
no factual background for commission of offences punishable under
Section 419, 420, 467, 468, 109 and 120-B of IPC, Section 66-D of IT
Act and Section 3/4 of the Gambling Act. Further submitted that the
police concerned just to make the case cognizable offence and invoking
the petitioner in non-bailable offences so that they are arrested, registered
the case for commission of these offences. Further submitted that the
offences of cheating punishable under Sections 419 and 420 of IPC is
constituted when someone was induced dishonestly to deliver any
property to any person, or to make, alter or destroy the whole or any part
of valuable security. Further submitted that under Section 467 of IPC is
constituted by, no documents were forged, which purports to be valuable
security and no such forgery was committed in relation to the documents,
which purports to receive or deliver any money and to constitute offence
under Section 468 of IPC. There was no evidence that the accused have
committed forgery and they did not intend to forge electronic records and
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ANUSHREE
PANDEY
Signing time: 05-04-2025
15:14:41
NEUTRAL CITATION NO.2025:MPHC-IND:9177 6 MCRC No.10997/2025
use them for the purpose of cheating or abet the offence of cheating to
constitute an offence under Section 109 of IPC. There was neither
abetment of an offence either by instigation or by conspiracy and there
was no criminal conspiracy under Section 120-B of IPC between the
accused and other persons or any bookies and there was no material
evidence collected about the conspiracy to commit the offence. Further
submitted that the investigating officer has not collected any material
documents from any of the service providers whether to know the sim
cards obtained by the petitioner / accused (Piyush Chopra) in the name of
fictitious persons for betting purposes. Further submitted that police
raided the house of the petitioner, where from the alleged gambling
amounts have been recovered, therefore, the ingredients of using some
place as a gambling house and the persons found in the act of gambling
both are missing, it was finally prayed that to allow the petition and to
quash the proceedings pending before the learned District Judge, Ujjain to
secure the ends of justice. Therefore, he would prays to quash of the said
charge-sheet against the petitioner (Piyush Chopra) pending before the
trial Court and allow the petition.
06. Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed for the criminal
petition and the police team was conducted raid in the house of petitioner
in H.No.18 and the betting is going on for Bangladesh and Netherlands T-
20 World Cup, 2024 by using forged sim cards, cell phones and huge
amounts were recovered at the spot and seized huge property like
electronic items, cell phone and crores of rupees from their possession,
the allegations made against them are attracted for the offences mentioned
in the charge-sheet as such the matter requires trial to ascertain the truth
or otherwise of the said allegations. Further submitted that there is no
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ANUSHREE
PANDEY
Signing time: 05-04-2025
15:14:41
NEUTRAL CITATION NO.2025:MPHC-IND:9177 7 MCRC No.10997/2025
merit in the contention of the petitioner that there are no allegations
against the petitioner with regard to the commission of offence, therefore,
he would pray for dismissal of the criminal petition.
07. Apropos the contentions as advanced the arguments by respective
counsels. Having perused the relevant facts and contentions raised by
learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor, in my
considered opinion, primary issue which requires determination in the
instant case is :
“(i). Whether, the allegations made against the petitioner
(Piyush Chopra) would attract the accusation made against
him and whether, there are any merits in the criminal petition
to allow ?”
POINT:
08. In a decision reported in State of Haryana v. Ch. Bhajanlal1, the
Hon’ble Apex Court held that in exercise of extraordinary power
conferred under Article 226 of Constitution of India or the inherent
powers under Section 482 Cr. P.C., the following categories of cases are
given by way of illustration, wherein, such power could be exercised
either to prevent abuse of the process of any Court or otherwise to secure
the ends of justice, though it may not be possible to lay down any precise
clearly defined and sufficiently channelized and inflexible guide, myriad
kinds of cases wherein, such power should be exercised.
09. The relevant guidelines read as under :
“(1) where the allegations made in the First Information
Report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face
value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie
constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused;
1 AIR 1992 SC 604
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ANUSHREE
PANDEY
Signing time: 05-04-2025
15:14:41
NEUTRAL CITATION NO.2025:MPHC-IND:9177 8 MCRC No.10997/2025
(2) where the allegations in the First Information Report and
other materials, if any, accompanying the F.I.R. do not
disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by
police officers under Section 156(1) of the Code except under
an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2)
of the Code;
(3) where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or
‘complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same
do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a
case against the accused;
(4) where the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a
cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable
offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer
without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under
Section 155(2) of the Code;
(5) where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so
absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no
prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is
sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused;
(6) where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the
provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under which a
criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and
continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific
provision in the Code or the concerned Act, providing
efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party;
(7) where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with
mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted
with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused
and with a view to spite him due to private and personal
grudge.”
We also give a note of caution to the effect that the
power of quashing a criminal proceeding should be exercised
very sparingly and with circumspection and that too in the
rarest of rare cases; that the court will not be justified in
embarking upon an enquiry as to the reliability or genuineness
or otherwise of the allegations made in the FIR or the
complaint and that the extraordinary or inherent powers do not
confer an arbitrary jurisdiction on the court to act according to
its whim or caprice.”
10. In a case of Paramjeet Batra v. State of Uttarakhand 2, the
Hon’ble Apex Court held at Para No.12 held as follows:
2 (2013) 11 SCC 673
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ANUSHREE
PANDEY
Signing time: 05-04-2025
15:14:41
NEUTRAL CITATION NO.2025:MPHC-IND:9177 9 MCRC No.10997/2025“12. While exercising its jurisdiction under Section 482 of the
Code the High Court has to be cautious. This power is to be
used sparingly and only for the purpose of preventing abuse of
the process of any court or otherwise to secure ends of justice.
Whether a complaint discloses a criminal offence or not
depends upon the nature of facts alleged therein. Whether
essential ingredients of criminal offence are present or not has
to be judged by the High Court…….”
11. In the light of above judgments, it has been repeatedly held by
Hon’ble Apex Court that inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of
Cr.P.C. should be exercised by the High Court sparingly and cautiously,
not in a routine and mechanical manner, the underline principle to
exercise the jurisdiction is to whether there is any abuse of process of law
and the same requires to be checked, to secure the ends of justice. It
appears that the record made available on file that the impugned FIR was
registered on the reliable information by Police, without disclosing the
source thereof and under the impression that some other unknown persons
had been resorting to betting in match Bangladesh Vs. Netherlands T-20
World Cup, 2024 as such the activity by them and the police appearing to
be aware that the case cannot be registered under the non-cognizable
offence and the petitioner / accused and others could not be arrested
without orders of the Magistrate to over come this difficulty it appears
that police had invoked the offence punishable under Sections 419, 420,
467, 468, 109 and 120-B of IPC along with Section 66-D of IT Act and
3 / 4 of Public Gambling (Madhya Pradesh) Act, it is not out of the place
to mention that the offence punishable under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468,
109 and 120-B of IPC cannot be constituted without someone having
been cheated by the accused, and who induces their property, further there
is no material evidence to see that the petitioner committed forgery for the
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ANUSHREE
PANDEY
Signing time: 05-04-2025
15:14:41
NEUTRAL CITATION NO.2025:MPHC-IND:9177 10 MCRC No.10997/2025
purpose of cheating, admittedly, the prosecution agencies has not
examined any of the service providers whether the petitioner has obtained
sim cards in the name of fictitious persons and those sim cards given to
the other accused persons for misusing the sim cards for betting activities,
it is clear and has been admitted that by the official respondents, there was
no complaint of any particular person with regard to accusation that he /
she had been cheated by using forged documents by any of the accused
including the petitioner. Therefore, there being no complaint or any
person having been cheated or induced by using forged documents to get
more money under betting in order to cheat the bookies. Therefore, the
case of commission of offences punishable under Section 419, 420, 467,
468, 109 and 120-B of IPC and Section 66-D of IT Act could not have
been registered.
12. In the instant case, the police in order to avoid seeking permission
under Section 155(2) of Cr.P.C. in respect of the offence punishable under
the Public Gambling (Madhya Pradesh) Act, 1867 has deliberately
invoked the Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 109 and 120-B of IPC and
Section 66-D of IT Act, 2008 and Section 3/4 of the Public Gambling
(Madhya Pradesh) Act, 1867 admittedly, there was no complaint from
anybody alleged cheating and forgery in the absence of any such
complaint the above sections under IPC cannot be invoked.
13. I have carefully perused the material available on record, the
criminal law is set into motion on the basis of the complaint lodged by the
Pratik Yadav, Cyber Cell Inspector, Ujjain. It is alleged in the complaint
that he received credible information that the petitioner (Piyush), a
resident of Mussadipura in H.No.18 running betting on a large scale on
the first floor and in which he makes crores of rupees were indulged in
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ANUSHREE
PANDEY
Signing time: 05-04-2025
15:14:41
NEUTRAL CITATION NO.2025:MPHC-IND:9177 11 MCRC No.10997/2025
cricket betting, got the money through website namely
LONDONEXCH9.com. However, the fact remains that he has not
disclosed as to the identity of the person, who has informed him that the
petitioner and others were cheating the public by using forged sim cards
in the name of fictitious persons. In the absence of a complaint alleging
that the complainant has been cheated and he has been dishonestly
induced to deliver my property by using forged sim cards, the offence
under Sections 419, 420, 467 and 468 of IPC does not get attracted.
14. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, before me, the
continuance of prosecution has against the petitioner will be a futile
exercise and it will be a waste a public time and energy, in this
circumstances, the principles laid down in Bhajanlal case (supra) and is
fairly applicable to this case. On perusal of the allegations in the FIR and
charge-sheet do not make out the case to satisfy the requirements under
Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 109 and 120-B of IPC, further on perusal of
the record, the FIR is vague is not lodged by any aggrieved party apart
from neither the names of aggrieved party nor amount involved is
mentioned, the prosecution has mentioned the offences to make out the
offence non-bailable and harass the petitioner with ulterior motive.
15. In this case at hand, the very case of the prosecution that the
petitioner (Piyush) operating betting by cheating many people in duplex
house on the basis of forged documents by taking fake sim cards in
different names and he is doing betting using those numbers. Admittedly,
the investigation agency has not been examined any of the service
providers, who has provided sim cards on whose names numbers were
given by them and also ought to have collected the applications from
them for issuance of sim cards without any basis invoked Sections 419,
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ANUSHREE
PANDEY
Signing time: 05-04-2025
15:14:41
NEUTRAL CITATION NO.2025:MPHC-IND:9177 12 MCRC No.10997/2025
420, 467 and 468 of IPC and 66-D of IT Act. The law is well settled with
regard to the fact that however strong the suspicion may be, it cannot take
the place of proof. Strong suspicion, coincidence, grave doubt cannot take
the place of proof. Always a duty is cast upon the courts to ensure that
suspicion does not take place of the legal proof. In this case, there is no
evidence that the petitioner is the beneficiary or he is the person produced
forged documents by taking fake sim cards in a different names with the
deceptive intention causes loss to the bookies or for wrongful gain, where
the prosecution miserably failed to prove a fraudulent and forged
transactions. The standard of proof in a criminal case is proof beyond
reasonable doubt because the right to personal liberty of a citizen can
never be taken away by the standard of preponderance of probability.
16. This case on hand is a classic example of poor prosecution and
shabby investigation which resulted benefit of doubt under clouds. The
investigating officer is expected to be diligent while discharging his
duties. He has to be fair, transparent and his only endeavour should be to
find out the truth. The investigating officer has not even taken bare
minimum care to find out the sim cards issued by the name of the service
providers and whether the applications submitted by the petitioner in
fictitious person and misused the sim cards for the purpose of betting in
the match of Bangladesh vs. Netherlands T-20 World Cup 2024. The
laches in the lopsided investigation goes to the root of the matter and fatal
to the case of prosecution. If this is the coordination between the
prosecution and the investigating agency, every criminal case tend to end
up in acquittal. In the process, the common man will lose confidence on
the criminal justice delivery system, which is not a good symptom. It is
the duty of the investigating officer, prosecution as well as the Courts to
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ANUSHREE
PANDEY
Signing time: 05-04-2025
15:14:41
NEUTRAL CITATION NO.2025:MPHC-IND:9177 13 MCRC No.10997/2025
ensure that full and material facts and evidence are brought on record, so
that there is no scope for miscarriage of justice.
17. On overall consideration of the entire material placed on record, the
law laid down by Hon’ble Apex Court referred (supra) it is suffix to
conclude that the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the
petitioner and the material produced before this Court directly indicate the
mala fide in prosecution of criminal proceedings against the petitioner
(Piyush) so also abuse the process of the court and where the allegations
in the FIR and the charge-sheet even if they are taken at their face value
and accepted entirely, do not constitute the offence alleged under Sections
419, 420, 467 and 468 of IPC in such cases, no question of appreciating
evidence arises, in a matter of looking the facts of the First Information
Report and the charge-sheet, for the offences mentioned in IPC does not
get attracted.
18. In the facts and circumstances, the principles laid down in Bhajan
lal case (supra) is fairly applicable to the facts of this case the allegations
made in the FIR so far as the offences under Section 419, 420, 467, 468,
109 and 120-B of IPC are not only absurd, but also improbable, which do
not make out the commission of any offence, particularly under Sections
419, 420, 467, 468, 109 and 120-B of IPC permitting the petitioner
(Piyush) to undergo the ordeal of trial would not also be futile but would
also be an abuse of process of law.
19. Having regard to the afore-stated discussions, the reasons stated
herein above, the proceedings carried against the petitioner for the
offences under Section 419, 420, 467, 468, 109 and 120-B of IPC it
amounts to abuse of process of law cannot be tried, with regard to the
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ANUSHREE
PANDEY
Signing time: 05-04-2025
15:14:41
NEUTRAL CITATION NO.2025:MPHC-IND:9177 14 MCRC No.10997/2025
special enactments Section 66-D of Information Technology
(Amendment) Act, 2008 and Section 3/4 of Public Gambling (Madhya
Pradesh) Act, 1976 may go on trial.
20. In the result, the proceedings against the petitioner (Piyush Chopra)
in S.T. No.41/2025 on the file of learned District and Session Judge at
Ujjain for the offences under Section 419, 420, 467, 468, 109 and 120-B
of IPC are hereby quashed and the proceedings in so far as the petitioner
(Piyush Chopra) concerned for the offences under Section 66-D of IT Act,
2008 and Section 3/4 of the Public Gambling (Madhya Pradesh) Act,
1867 are hereby dismissed and he may go on trial.
21. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed off.
22. Misc. applications pending, if any, shall be stand closed.
(Duppala Venkata Ramana, J)
Anushree
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ANUSHREE
PANDEY
Signing time: 05-04-2025
15:14:41
[ad_1]
Source link