DISTRICT: SOUTH 24 PARGANAS
BEFORE THE ADDL. CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,
ALIPORE
CASE NO A/C 496/10. OF 2010, FIR NO. 131/10 OF JADAVPORE P.S
IN THE MATTER OF:
A Petition of Complaint U/S: 156(3) of
the Code of Criminal Procedure:
AND
IN THE MATTER OF:
MRS. UMA ROY, w/o. Partha Roy
residing at 3 B/C, Siddharth Golf View,
27/4, P.G.M Shah Road, Golf Green,
P.S. Jadavpore, Kolkata 700 095.
.......... COMPLAINANT
- VERSUS -
1. MR. SUSHIL KUMAR MOHTA,
Director, Merlin Projects Ltd, Merlin
House, 79 Sambunath Pandit Sreet, P.S
Bhowanipore, Kolkata 700020.
2. MR. NAVNEET BAHETI, C/o: Nitin
Baheti, Merlin Projects Ltd, Merlin
House, 79 Sambunath Pandit St., P.S
Bhowanipore, Kolkata 700020.
3. MR. VIKASH MIMANI, Project
Manager, Merlin Projects Ltd, Merlin
House, 79 Sambunath Pandit Street,
P.S Bhowanipore, Kolkata - 700020.
.......... ACCUSED PERSONS
Date of occurrence: 22/09/2009 and it continues………
Offences committed: U/s: 471/465/468/384/506/120B IPC &
U/s: 66A/66B/66C/72/72A of Information
Technology Act 2000/ 2008.
2
The humble petition of the
complainant above named
Most respectfully sheweth:
1. That your petitioner is a 57 year old housewife and a former
NRI residing at the address mentioned in the Cause Title.
2. That my husband Partha Roy is a 65 years old Sr. Citizen and
former NRI now employed as the CEO of a Public Ltd. Co.
3. That our son Pandav Roy, aged 31 years, is a qualified
professional with an M.Sc Degree in I.T from UK. Unfortunately, in
2007 he developed a mental illness (Schizo-Affective Disorder) and
had to return to India where he is now undergoing treatment.
4. That the accused no.1, Mr. Sushil Kumar Mohta is a
Promoter-Developer by profession and Director of M/s. Merlin
Projects Ltd.
5. That the accused no. 2 , Mr. Navneet Baheti is a past
employee of ICICI Bank and is now operating as a Real Estate
Agent.
6. That the accused no.3, Mr. Vikas Mimani is working for gain
as Project Manager in the aforementioned M/s. Merlin Projects Ltd.
7. That the accused no.1 & 2 had cheated our family of rightful
ownership of the house purchased by us from them by failing to
transfer the property to us after receiving full payment and to seek
due justice, my husband had filed the following cases.
i. Case No. 07/O/2007 dated 01/03/07 filed before the Ld. State
Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission.
Current status: The Hon‟ble Justice Mr. Aloke Chakrabarty
passed the Final Order on 24/02/09 directing the OP to transfer &
hand over the property to the complainants and to pay
compensation & costs, but the OP could not execute the Order
because they had already sold the property to some other party
while the above case was „sub-judice‟
2
3
Xerox copy of the above order is attached (Annexure 1)
ii. Case No.90/08 dated 05/04/08 of Bhowanipore P.S/DD, U/S.
156(3) Cr.P.C for offences committed U/S: 420/427/120B.
Current status: Since the last 23 months, the IO of the case has
failed to submit any legally tenable report.
Xerox copy of the above FIR is attached (Annexure 2)
iii. Case No.526/08 dated 25/09/09 of Bishnupur P.S U/S. 156(3)
Cr.P.C for offences committed U/S: 420/406.
Current status: Report of I.O not received even after 5 months.
Xerox copy of the above FIR is attached (Annexure 3)
8. That accused no.1 apprehending prosecution has been
trying to coerce my husband to withdraw the above criminal cases
by physically threatening him through various unknown persons.
9. That my husband had ignored the above threats and to
expedite the long overdue Police Report on Case No. 90/08 dated
05/04/08 of Bhowanipore PS/DD, my husband had been meeting
various senior Police officers asking for their help. But instead of
helping him, on 30/07/09, the O.C of Anti Cheating Section, DD,
Lalbabzar, summoned my husband to his office and threatened to
have him arrested if the above case was not withdrawn.
10. That our Ld. Legal Advisor, Mr. Nilmani Dutta, witnessed
the above incident and reported the matter by a letter dated
31/07/09 to the Commissioner of Police, but no action was taken.
Xerox copy of the said letter dated 31/07/09 is attached (Annexure 4).
11. That accused no. 1, through mutual acquaintances, was
aware of the mental illness of our son and having failed to subjugate
my husband by threatening him directly and through Police Officers,
the accused no.1 with malafide intent, collected private & financial
details about myself & my son from some unknown source.
12. That accused no.1 then sent our details to accused no.2 by
an e-mail instructing accused no. 2 to obtain our highly confidential
Credit Information Reports (CIR) from the Credit Information Bureau
3
4
of India Ltd (CIBIL) which the accused persons were not legally
empowered to access. The content of this e-mail sent by accused
no.1 to accused no.2 is quoted below:
Dear Navneet,
I would like to know the CIBIL Report of the followings:
1) Pandav Roy, son of Mr. Partha Roy, date of birth 22.11.1977
residing at (a) 31/2A, Sadananda Road, Kolkata – 700 026. (b)
Apartment No. 3B & 3C, Siddharth Go, 27/4, Prince Gulam
Mohammad Shah Road, Golf Green, Kolkata – 700 045.
2) Mrs. Uma Roy, wife of Mr. Partha Roy date of birth
02.09.1952 residing at (a) 31/2A, Sadananda Road, Kolkata –
700 026. (b) Apartment No. 3B & 3C, Siddharth Go, 27/4,
Prince Gulam Mohammad Shah Road, Golf Green, Kolkata –
700 045. For your information Mrs. Uma Roy had a credit
card, the detail is as under: SBI 4317575209025502. Mrs.
Uma Roy also had some bank accounts in SBI & Union
Banks. Her Passport No. A8153183.
Regards
Sushil Mohta”
13. That being an ex-employee of ICICI Bank, accused no.2
knew the “CIBIL Member ID Code” of the Bank.
14. That by forging a “Credit Information Record Request” and
impersonating as an employee of ICICI Bank „on-line‟, accused
no.2 obtained our private CIBIL Reports and forwarded the same
to accused no. 1 by an e-mail which is quoted below: :
“Re: Reg Partha Roy
Navneet Baheti: To director, me, Vikash
CIBIL reports attached.
Rgds,
Navneet”
“Print this mail only if absolutely necessary. Save Paper. Save Trees."
“This e-mail message may contain confidential, proprietary or legally privileged
information. It should not be used by anyone who is not the original intended
recipient. If you have erroneously received this message, please delete it immediately
and notify the sender. The recipient acknowledges that ICICI Bank or its subsidiaries
and associated companies, (collectively "ICICI Group"), are unable to exercise control
or ensure or guarantee the integrity of/over the contents of the information contained
in e-mail transmissions and further acknowledges that any views expressed in this
message are those of the individual sender and no binding nature of the message shall
4
5
be implied or assumed unless the sender does so expressly with due authority of ICICI
Group. Before opening any attachments please check them for viruses and defects."
2 attachments — download all attachments
Xerox Copy of the above e-mail string is attached (Annexure 5).
15. That in the „disclaimer statement‟ (in small print) at the
bottom of the above e-mail it may be observed that the name of
ICICII Bank/Group appears repeatedly which would normally
indicate that the said Reports were requested for by ICICI Bank.
16. That on checking with ICICI Bank, I was informed by an e-
mail dated 17/12/09 that the said CIBIL Reports had not been sent
by ICICI Bank and Mr. Navneet Baheti was not their employee.
Xerox copy of the above e-mail is attached (Annexure 6)
17. That the relevant rules pertaining to access & disclosure of
CIBIL Reports are quoted below:
“Access to CIBIL Information (FAQ)
Q.4: Who are Members of CIBIL?
Ans: Banks, Financial Institutions, State Financial
Corporations, Non-Banking Financial Companies, Housing
Finance Companies and Credit Card Companies are Members
of CIBIL.
Q.15: Who can access CIRs?
Ans: “Reports can be accessed by Members on the principle
of reciprocity, ie, only those Members who have provided all
their data to CIBIL are permitted to access CIRs. Members
can do so only to take valid credit decisions. Disclosure to
any other person or entity is prohibited”.
Xerox copy of the above FAQ is attached and highlighted
(Annexure 7)
18. That from the above facts it is evident that accused nos.1 &
2 acting in conspiracy with each other and by misusing our
personal details in conjunction with the “CIBIL Member ID Code”
of ICICI Bank, has forged an electronic “CIBIL Credit Information
Record Request” and passed it off as a genuine request made by
ICICI Bank to unlawfully obtain the said CIBIL Reports.
5
6
19. That after receiving the above reports, accused no. 3 widely
circulated the same with false & malicious comments about my
husband & son to Police Departments, Banks & Government
Officials and also to our friends & relatives all over the world.
Xerox copy of one such e-mail sent by the accused to my brother-
in-law in USA is attached (Annexure 8)
20. That after circulating the above CIBIL Reports, accused
no.3, Mr. Vikas Mimani warned our Ld. Legal Advisor Mr. Nilmani
Dutta that Mr. Sushil Kumar Mohta had very strong influence with
Police Officers & Senior Bankers and unless the cases against him
were withdrawn, he would ensure that my son was arrested and
tortured by the Police for failing to repay Bank loans.
21. That in reply, our Ld. Legal Advisor Mr. Nilmani Dutta
warned Mr. Vikas Mimani that they were misusing the said CIBIL
Reports because these were not related to the subject matter of
the pending cases and would not influence the merits or final
outcome of the said cases.
22. That our Ld. Advocate Mr. Nilmani Dutta further mentioned
that he would investigate the veracity of the said CIBIL reports and
find out how these were obtained by the accused persons.
23. That in reply, Mr. Vikas Mimani, sent an e-mail on 07/10/09
to Mr. Nilmani Dutta with copy marked to our home e-mail address
and the relevant portion of this e-mail is quoted below:
“With regard to the CIBIL report, we state that in the fitness of
things it would be appropriate and sensible to restrain from
exploring the veracity of the CIBIL report for the present. Who
knows laying down the CIBIL report beneath the investigative
eyes of scrutiny and intensive examination might end up in
leading your client within the circumference of custodial
detention “.
24. That my son was in a disturbed and irrational frame of mind
due to his illness and after reading the above e-mail he was panic
stricken and started imagining that he would be arrested & tortured
by the Police. He then lapsed into a deep depression and even
started contemplating suicide.
6
7
25. That as per medical evidence, the nature of my son‟s illness
is such that it increases the risk of a patient committing suicide by
20% to 50% as compared to a normal person.
26. That due to this reason, I became highly agitated and in
desperation I directed our Ld. Advocate Mr. Nilmani Dutta to plead
with Mr. Vikas Mimani to stop him from mentally torturing my son as
this could cause irreparable damage to his mental health and even
drive him to suicide.
27. That Mr. Vikas Mimani refused to do anything until the
cases filed against them by my husband were withdrawn and to
further demonstrate their powers the accused persons continued
to send annoying and menacing e-mails and cause further
distress to my son Pandav Roy (P.ROY) by posting the said CIBIL
Reports with malicious & false comments in a website hosted by
them titled “MR.P.ROY LOAN DEFAULTER …………………”
From the above facts & circumstances, it is evident that the
accused persons committed the following offences under IPC.
i. Accused no. 2, on behalf of and under instructions from
accused no.1, forged an electronic “CIBIL Credit Information
Record Request.” Incorporating the „CIBIL Member ID Code‟ of
ICICI Bank and passed off this forged document as a genuine
“CIBIL Credit Information Record Request” generated by ICICI
Bank. Therefore, the accused persons dishonestly used a
forged electronic document as genuine which constitutes an
offence U/s. 471 IPC and the accused persons are therefore
liable for prosecution U/S. 465 IPC.
ii. Accused nos. 1 & 3 threatened the petitioner‟s mentally ill son
with arrest in order to pressurize his father to withdraw the cases
filed against them. The above actions construe criminal
intimidation as defined U/s. 503 IPC and the accused persons
are therefore liable for prosecution U/s 506 IPC. Their offence is
even more heinous because they knew that the petitioner‟s son
was suffering from a mental illness and by causing distress to
him, the accused persons could even drive him to suicide.
7
8
iii. The accused persons obtained the said CIBIL Reports by
means of forgery with the ulterior motive of using the same to
pressurize the petitioner‟s husband to withdraw the cases filed
by him against accused nos. 1, 3 & others. Had the petitioner‟s
husband succumbed to their pressure then it would have
enabled the accused persons to cheat the petitioner‟s family of
rightful ownership of their house without fear of any retribution
through the process of law. Therefore, it is evident that the
accused persons committed forgery with the malicious intent
and ulterior motive of cheating the petitioner‟s family of rightful
ownership of their property which renders the said accused
persons liable for prosecution U/s: 468 IPC.
Because the accused persons used computer resources to
commit the said offences they are also liable for prosecution under
the following sections of the Information Technology Act 2000
(ITA 2000) and Amendments thereof made in 2008 (ITAA 2008)
a. Sending offensive messages through communication
service, etc: Accused no 3 on behalf of accused no.1 sent
menacing & offensive electronic mail messages and are
therefore liable for prosecution U/s: 66 A of ITAA 2008.
b. Dishonestly receiving stolen computer resource or
communication device: Accused no.1 dishonestly received the
confidential CIBIL Reports of the petitioner & her son sent by
accused no.2 as electronic mail attachments being fully aware
that the said reports were stolen from the Credit Information
Bureau of India Ltd by accused no.2. Therefore accused no.1
dishonestly received stolen consumer resourcec which makes
him liable for prosecution U/s: 66 B of ITAA 2008.
c. Identity theft: Accused no.2 acting under instructions of
accused no.1 made use of the electronic password / other
unique identification feature of ICICI Bank to fraudulently &
dishonestly obtain the private CIBIL Reports of the petitioner &
her son and therefore accused no.2 is liable for prosecution for
identity theft as defined U/s: 66 C of ITAA 2008.
d. Breach of confidentiality & privacy: The accused nos. 1 & 2 by
using forged electronic documents obtained the confidential
8
9
CIBIL Reports of the petitioner & her son without their consent
and are therefore liable for prosecution U/s: 72 of ITA 2000.
e. Disclosure of information in breach of lawful contract: The
accused no. 2 under instructions from accused no.1 gained
unlawful access to the personal information of the Petitioner &
her son with the intent to cause wrongful loss to them and
disclosed the same without their consent. Therefore accused
nos.1 & 2 are liable for prosecution U/s: 72A of ITAA 2008.
The petitioner had filed this complaint before the I.C of Jadavpore
P.S on 30/12/09 (under G.D No.3178) but no action was taken.
From the facts & circumstances mentioned earlier in this petition it is
evident that by using his vast wealth & political influence, Mr. Sushil
Kumar Mohta has been blocking the Police from submitting any
report against him and thereby preventing the said cases from being
tried in any court of law.
The Indian Constitution guarantees protection of rights of
weaker sections of the society like women & mentally
disabled persons. Your complainant therefore feels that
being the mother of a mentally ill son, her petition, if kindly
admitted, deserves to be treated on a ‘fast-track’ basis so that
the accused persons can be restrained by law from taking
further inhuman actions which could cause irreparable
damage to the already fragile mental health of her only son
and could even drive him to suicide.
Under the above circumstances, the
petitioner prays that Your Honour would
be pleased to send this petition of
complaint to the Inspector-in-Charge of
Jadavpur P.S, U/S 156 (3) of the Code
of Criminal Procedure for investigation
of the case treating this petition of
complaint as FIR, proceed with the case
as per law and punish the accused
persons accordingly for the ends of
justice and pass such order or orders as
you deem it fit and proper.
9
10
And for this act of kindness, your Petitioner, as in duty bound,
shall pray.
LIST OF WITNESSES:
1. Mr. Nilmani Dutta, Senior Advocate, Calcutta High Court.
2. Mr. Partha Roy.
3. Medical Reports of the complainant‟s son Mr. Pandav Roy.
4. Correspondences & others.
VERIFICATION;
I, Uma Roy, the complainant herein do hereby declare that the
statements made in the foregoing paragraphs 1 to 28 of this petition
are true to my knowledge and the rest are my submission before the
Learned Court. I sign this verification on this 1st day of March 2010 at
my Advocates‟ Chamber.
Petitioner: …………..…...……………
Prepared in my chamber:
Advocate: ………….…………………
10