Sangham Khanna Yadav vs The State Of Telangana on 7 December, 2023

Sangham Khanna Yadav vs The State Of Telangana on 7

December, 2023
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER

CRIMINAL PETITION No.2801 OF 2019

ORDER:

1. This Criminal Petition is filed to quash the proceedings against the petitioner/A1 in C.C.No.1502
of 2016 on the file of VI Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at L.B.Nagar for the offences under
Sections 406, 420 of IPC and Section 24 (1)(b) of Emigration Act, 1983 (for short 'the Act of 1983').

2. On 30.07.2016, the Sub-Inspector of Police, P.S.Saroornagar while on patrolling duty, received

information that this petitioner and another were involved in running unauthorized overseas
agency. Accordingly, the premises of this petitioner was raided. During the course of raid, police
seized one Dell lap top, one Motorola mobile phone, moto E and Sim No.9703843847, Xerox
passport copies-35, copies of invoices-5, copies of visa grant notices-6, i.e, (Sri Krishna Chaitanya,
dt.29.12.2015, Rajesh Kumar, dt.09.12.2015, Suprabha Bhat, dt.21.04.2015, Indra Shyam Dasari,
dt.18.04.2016 Nagaraju dt.29.03.2014, Swetha Adupu, dt.30.05.2016, copies of visit visa grnat
letter-6 i.e., (Moin Mohammed, dt.22.02.2016 & 10.02.2015, Akther Sultana, dt.24.02.2016 &
06.02.2015, Narsimha Chary Banala, dt.27.07.2016, Apeksha Sanga, dt.11.05.2016, Abdul Majid
dt.27.04.2016 and copies of license immigration Newzeland-1. The said seizure was in the presence
of witnesses.

3. Thereafter, the police filed charge sheet alleging commission of offences under Sections 406, 420
IPC and Section 24(1)(b) of the Act of 1983.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that false case has been registered
against the petitioner and in fact, the petitioner and another have valid licence in the name of
M/s.STEDFAST Services. The documents are also filed which were taken from the Registrar of
Firms. The income-tax returns are also filed by the petitioner in the name of M/s.STEDFAST
Services. Even otherwise, no one was examined to show that any person was cheated. In the absence
of any other witnesses except the alleged seizures, no case is made out against the petitioners.

5. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that there is no reason
why all the documents and other information would be with the petitioner. There is no explanation
for the said possession of the documents. In fact, the said documents are for the purpose of cheating.
Accordingly, the trial before the Court below has to go on.

6. It is admitted that no witnesses are examined who have either approached this petitioner or
sought any services from the petitioner for the purpose of immigration. To attract an offence under
Section 406 of IPC, the basic requirement is that there should be an entrustment of the property and
such entrusted property should have been subjected to misappropriation. There is nothing on record

Indian Kanoon - http://indiankanoon.org/doc/53872041/ 1

 Sangham Khanna Yadav vs The State Of Telangana on 7 December, 2023

to remotely suggest that there was any entrustment made to this petitioner, as such, the question of
criminal misappropriation punishable under Section 406 of IPC does not arise.

7. Offence under Section 420 of IPC is made out when a person deceives another. Pursuant to such
act of deception, the person deceived should have delivered property. In the present case, except
seizure of the documents, lap top and documents pertaining to some persons, the prosecution did
not make any attempt to approach any of the persons and examine them to know whether the
petitioner had in any manner promised them of sending abroad.

8. For the sake of convenience, Sections 10 and 16 and 24(1)(b) of the Act of 1983 are extracted
hereunder:

"10. No person to function as recruiting agent without a valid certificate Save as

otherwise provided in this Act, no recruiting agent shall, after the commencement of
this Act, commence or carry on the business of recruitment except under and in
accordance with a certificate issued in that behalf by the registering authority:

PROVIDED that a person carrying on the business of recruiting agent immediately

before the commencement of this Act may continue to carry on such business without
such a certificate for a period of one month from such commencement, and if he has
made an application for such certificate under this Act within the said period of one
month and such application is in the prescribed form and contains the prescribed
particulars, till the disposal of such application by the registering authority.

16. Recruitment by employers to be through recruiting agent or under permit Save as

otherwise provided by or under this Act, no employer shall recruit any citizen of India
for employment in any country or place outside India except--

(a) through a recruiting agent competent under this Act to make such recruitment, or

(b) in accordance with a valid permit issued in this behalf under this chapter.

24. Offences and penalties:

(1) Whoever-

(a)....

(b) contravenes the provisions of section 10 or section 16;"

9. Under Section 10 of the Act, an agent shall not carry on business except in accordance with the
certificate issued by the concerned authority. To show that the petitioner was running the firm for
recruitment, witnesses should have been examined who approached the petitioner. Merely finding
documents will not attract offence under Section 10 of the Act. Further, Section 16 of the Act would

Indian Kanoon - http://indiankanoon.org/doc/53872041/ 2

 Sangham Khanna Yadav vs The State Of Telangana on 7 December, 2023

not attract since the petitioner is not employer.

10. The police, except seizing documents have not in any manner tried to ascertain the origin of the
documents or the purpose for which the documents were found in the premises of the petitioner.
Merely producing documents will not in any manner attract the offence of either criminal
misappropriation or cheating. Merely marking documents before the Court cannot be made basis to
draw inference of committing any illegal acts.

11. For the aforesaid reasons, the proceedings against petitioner in C.C.No.1502 of 2016 on the file of
VI Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at L.B.Nagar, are hereby quashed.

12. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed. Consequently, miscellaneous applications, if any,
pending in this Criminal Petition, shall stand closed.

_________________ K.SURENDER, J Dt.07.12.2023 kvs

Indian Kanoon - http://indiankanoon.org/doc/53872041/ 3