Ritick Shaw And Another vs. State Of West Bengal
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioners, Ritick Shaw and another, applied to the Calcutta High Court to quash a criminal proceeding initiated by ADPC Cyber Crime Police Station Case no. 35/25. The proceeding was based on allegations of running an illegal call centre to cheat people from various Indian states. The accused allegedly collected customer databases from online shopping companies and charged for GST and other deposit amounts when customers were trapped. During the investigation, a large number of mobile phones, ATM cards, laptops, SIM cards, and diaries of online shopping sites were seized. Petitioner no. 1 was identified as the mastermind. The petitioners claimed innocence and stated they were ready to cooperate with the investigation, asserting no prima facie case was made out.
Held
The Court held that a plain reading of the First Information Report (FIR) indicated that a prima facie case was made out against the petitioners. The allegations of running an illegal call centre to cheat people, collecting customer databases, charging GST and deposit amounts, and operating without valid documents, supported by the seizure of numerous mobile phones, ATM cards, laptops, SIM cards, and diaries, were sufficient to warrant further investigation. The Court found that the petitioners' claims of innocence and false implication were disputed questions of fact that could not be adjudicated in an application for quashing. Consequently, the Court found no merit in the application for quashing the proceeding.
Key Issues
1. Whether a prima facie case is made out against the petitioners based on the First Information Report (FIR) and annexed documents, warranting the continuation of the criminal proceeding under Sections 316(2)/318(4)/319(2)/336(3)/338/340(2) of the BNS and Sections 20 and 21 of the Indian Telegraph Act. Petitioner's argument: The petitioners contended that they are innocent, falsely implicated, and that no prima facie case is established from the FIR. They argued that further continuation of the proceeding would be an abuse of the process of law and that they were cooperating with the investigation. State's argument: The State vehemently opposed the prayer for quashing, arguing that a plain reading of the FIR revealed allegations of running an illegal call centre for cheating, collecting customer data, charging GST and deposits, and operating without valid documents. The State submitted that seized items supported the allegations and that the investigation was at a nascent stage.
Sections Cited
Section 316, Section 318, Section 319, Section 336, Section 338, Section 340, Section 61, Section 20, Section 21
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
In The High Court at Calcutta Criminal Revisional Juri iction Appellate Side Coram: The Hon’ble Justice Jay Sengupta
CRR 2538 of 2025 Ritick Shaw & Anr. Vs. State of West Bengal
For the petitioners : Mr. Fazlur Rahman
Mr. Babul Hussain
Mr. Mihinur Hossain For the State
: Mr. Suman De
Ms. Baishakhi Chatterjee Heard on : 24.07.2025
Judgment on : 24.07.2025
Jay Sengupta, J.:- This is an application for quashing of a proceeding in ADPC Cyber Crime Police Station Case no. 35/25 dated 26.04.2025 under Sections 316(2)/318(4)/319(2)/336(3)/338/340(2)/61(2) of the BNS and Sections 20 and 21 of the Indian Telegraph Act.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits as follows. The petitioners are absolutely innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. One of the petitioners was issued notices during
2
investigation and they are ready to cooperate with the investigation of the case. No prima facie case is made out as would be evident from a plain reading of the First Information Report and any further continuation of impugned proceeding shall be an abuse of the process of law.
Learned counsel appearing for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for quashing. From a plain reading of the First Information Report, it appears that allegations have been levelled against the accused for running an illegal call- centre in order to cheat people from different States of India. The accused used to collect customer’s database from different online shopping companies. When the customers got trapped they charged for GST and other deposit amounts. They used several online sites for such purpose. No valid document could be produced for running such call-centre. From the place of occurrence, a huge number of mobile phones, ATM cards, Laptops, SIM cards and diaries of online shopping sites were collected. The petitioner no. 1 was termed as the mastermind behind this and his associates were operating by either staying abroad and in other parts of the country.
It appears from the documents annexed that relevant seizures were also made and the police was looking for the suspects. Therefore, it appears from a plain reading of the First Information Report that a prima facie case is made out against the petitioners and the investigation is at a nascent stage.
3
The claims of the petitioners that they are innocent and have been falsely implicated are essentially disputed questions of fact, which cannot be decided in an application for quashing.
Therefore, I do not find any merit in this application for quashing.
Accordingly, the same is dismissed, however, without any order as to costs. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties upon compliance with requisite formalities.
(Jay Sengupta, J.)
Reproduced from the public record of the Calcutta High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.