Calcutta HC refuses to quash case against ‘Online Legal Services’ company for allegedly cheating lady who sought advice on credit card fraud

The Calcutta High Court has refused to quash a criminal case against the owners of an online ‘legal services’ company, who had allegedly duped a lady who had fallen victim to credit card fraud and approached them through Google to help her report the same.

A single bank of Judge Ajay Kumar Gupta held:

It seems that the said company under the banner of one website has cheated so many people in the same manner as opposite party No. 2. Complainant further tried to contact the company but they did not agree to talk to her and further used slang terms against her. She has been duped by the said company… Caller stated that they have their own cyber cell where they will register the FIR and charge an amount of Rs. 1,179/-. The said amount was debited from her bank account but despite the assurance, she was not provided with a copy of the FIR and no action was taken. No service was provided to her for what they charged.

The victim lady/opponent No. 2 has filed a written complaint with the Officer-in-Charge of Bidhan Nagar Cyber ​​Crime Police Station accusing her of receiving a call on her mobile number from an unknown number, where the caller told her that a gift voucher worth of Rs. 4,000 had been spent on her.

It was further alleged that the caller introduced himself as a bank employee and asked her to activate the card as per his telephone instructions to receive the above amount. She followed his instructions and in the process she was awarded a sum of Rs. Her credit card was allegedly charged 12,000.

She realized that she had been deceived by the caller and started searching Google Chrome for a way to report such an incident. During her search, she came across a website namely “Online Legal India” where there was an option to fill the customer information form on its portal.

It is further alleged that she received another call from a phone number associated with the website and the caller instructed her to provide some personal details and bank account details related to the fraud and deceit perpetrated on her.

The caller further assured that they would help her get her defrauded money back. It was further alleged that the caller asked her not to approach any police station to file a complaint.

The caller claimed that they have their own cyber cell where they will register FIR and for that they will charge an amount of Rs. 1,179/-. The said amount was paid from her SBI bank account.

Despite their assurance, no copy of the FIR was provided to her nor any action taken by them. No service was provided to her, although they did charge for it.

The petitioner states that the company has a business that provides legal advice and assistance against charging certain fees to the client. The company has taken immediate steps to file an online complaint with the Bidhan Nagar Commissionerate by filling up the necessary proforma.

It was stated that the company had charged an amount of Rs. 1,179 for the services rendered to her. The company provided services to her legally, without misleading her in any way.

It was stated that their company was sealed even though the petitioner was completely innocent and had not committed any criminal offense as alleged and was wrongly implicated in the case.

It was alleged that she had paid compensation amounting to Rs. 1,179 for providing legal services to the opposite party No. 2. as the company is a legal service provider through online services and charges service fees from the customer.

The state lawyer argued that the company and its director are deeply involved in misleading innocent people through cybercrime. During the investigation, the investigating officer recorded the statements of various witnesses under Section 161 of the CrPC. Huge numbers of relevant documents, incriminating articles and gadgets were seized.

It was stated that although the company claims to be a legal services company, no appropriate action or steps have been taken by the company after payment of the fees charged by them. As a result, the complainant did not get timely redress from any authority and faced loss of his hard-earned savings.

Accordingly, it was stated that investigation was underway and prima facie there is a strong case against the present petitioner.

While hearing the arguments, the court noted that the company, under its banner, had not only stopped the complainant from approaching the cyber cell of the state police but had also duped many persons in the same manner as opposite party No. 2.

Thus it was held that: “The court is of the opinion that at this initial stage of the investigation it would not be appropriate and appropriate to terminate the proceedings without justifiable reasons. The Court cannot inquire into the reliability, genuineness or otherwise of the allegation contained in the FIR/complaint.”

The review request was therefore rejected.

Case: Rajesh Kewat Managing Director, Fast Info Legal Services Private Limited versus State of West Bengal and another

Case number: CRR 1175 from 2023

Visa: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 243

Click here to read the order