10.9.2026 SL No. 34 Ct No. 42 SB CRR 2343 of 2024 Karikar Eduwealth Private Limited & Ors. Vs. Abhishek Paul Mr. Sourav Mondal Mr. Arijit Bhuiya Mr. Rony Mondal … for the petitioners 1. This revisional application has been preferred by the petitioners seeking quashing of the criminal proceeding initiated under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, being C.N. No. 452 of 2022 under Sections 34, 120B, 406, 415, 418, and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, currently pending before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 19th Court, Calcutta. 2. The background of the matter, as projected by the petitioners, is that the opposite party was formerly associated with their company, during which time he allegedly misappropriated company property consisting of a Lenovo laptop and a mobile phone, alongside securing an advance of Rs. 1,10,000/- on the pretext of urgent family exigencies. Upon his failure to refund the said amount upon demand, Nimta Police Station Case No. 353 of 2022 dated 20th June, 2022 was instituted against him, which subsequently culminated in a charge sheet under Sections 420, 406, 381, 120B, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. It is further contended that the opposite party had transferred a sum of Rs. 1,87,327/- into the account of Karikar Eduwealth Private Limited (bearing Account No. 918020112213727) between 6th June, 2021 and 4th August, 2021 for routing through bitotrade.in, against which the company deposited Rs. 1,84,000/- to purchase TRON and activated packages for Avishek Paul and his family members. 3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners draws the attention of this Court to paragraph 3 of the complaint petition, wherein it is averred that "for mutual funds certificate, that the complainant money transfer in accuseds company account no. 918020112213727, 'AXIS BANK LTD', Dunlop branch, Kolkata of Rs. 1,87,327/- (Rupees One Lac Eighty Seven Thousand Three Hundred Twenty Seven Only) for Accused persons Nos. 1 to 4". Building upon this premise, it is strenuously argued that since no mutual fund certificates ever existed, the entire foundation of the criminal complaint is rendered inherently improbable, which constitutes a sufficient ground for quashing the proceeding. In support of this contention, learned counsel places reliance upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Delhi Race Club (1940) Ltd. v. State of U.P. [(2024) 10 SCC 690] and invokes the classic parameters formulated in State of Haryana v. Ch. Bhajan Lal [AIR 1992 SC 604], arguing that no prima facie case is made out from the face of the record. 4. Despite repeated calls, proper service of notice, and ample opportunities afforded by this Court, none appears to represent the opposite party at the time of hearing. 5. I have perused the materials available on record, including the formal complaint filed by the opposite party. A close scrutiny reveals that in paragraphs 4, 5, 6, and 7 of the complaint, as well as during his solemn examination under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the complainant has categorically reiterated the factum of transferring Rs. 1,87,327/- to the petitioners. Furthermore, one Mr. Sudip Kr. Chandra was also examined under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and he corroborated the same version in his statement. 6. Acting upon these evidentiary materials, the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Calcutta, took cognizance of the offenses on 11th March, 2022 and directed the issuance of summons against the accused persons on 30th March, 2022. 7. It is a well-established principle of criminal jurisprudence that at the stage of quashing under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure or in revisional proceedings, the Court is not required to conduct a mini-trial or meticulously weigh the probative value of conflicting factual assertions. The Revisional Court possesses a very limited jurisdiction and must refrain from appreciating evidence dehors the record. When prima facie sufficient materials are available disclosing the ingredients of alleged offenses, and the dispute essentially boils down to disputed questions of fact that can only be conclusively determined by the learned Trial Court on the basis of comprehensive evidence adduced during trial, this Court finds no justification to intervene at this nascent stage. 8. In view of the preceding discussions and the totality of the facts and circumstances of this case, the revisional application is devoid of merit and deserves to be dismissed. 9. Accordingly, the revisional application being C.R.R. 2343 of 2024 is dismissed. 10. The learned Trial Court is directed to expedite the proceedings and take all necessary steps to ensure the expeditious progression of the case in accordance with law, without granting unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties. 11. There shall be no order as to costs. 12. Interim order, if any, stands vacated. 13. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties upon compliance with requisite formalities. (Uday Kumar, J.)