Vikas Arora Vs. Dr.

Sanjay Sharma
--1--

In the Court of Davender Judicial Magistrate Ist Class,

Gurugram. UID NO. HR0330

Criminal Compliant No. 163

Date of Institution : 5.11.2015
Date of order : 16.8.2017.

Vikas Arora son of Rajesh Arora resident of 12 Bank colony,

Gurugram.

-----Complainant
Versus

1.Dr. Sanjay Sharma son of Sh. M.R Sharma r/o 3311 Sector 23,
Gurugram.

2. Sonia Vaid, Resident fo 3311, Sector 23, Gurugram.

3. M/s Qubit Technologies Private Ltd 3311, Sector 23, Gurugram.

4. M/s Wikipedia India Chapter having its office at no. 194, 2nd C
Cross Domlur 2nd stage,Bangalore through its Director.

5. Mr. R. Jagannathan editor in chief of Forbes India having its office

at Digital 18 Media Ltd Ground Floor, Empire complex, 414
Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai.

-----Accused.

Police Station Sector 40 Gurugram.

Complaint under Section 352,355,383,384,387,388,389

465,468,469,500,501,503,506,507,120-B IPC and 34 of the
IPC.

Present: Complainant in person with Sh. M.K. Dang Advocate.

O R D E R:

The present complaint has been filed by the

complainant alleging that he is law abiding and working as Senior

General Sales and Marketing with M/s Raheja Developers Limited

having its office at Raheja Atlantis Sector 31-32A Gurugram. The

1
 Vikas Arora Vs. Dr. Sanjay Sharma
--2--

said company is reputed real estate company having immense

goodwill. Raheja developers has developed numerous projects

including Qutab Farms, Raheja Pine Gardens, Sohna Farm, Raheja

Highways etc. The said company had been started from the scratch

by its chairman Mr. Navin Raheja who is self made man putting

hard work throughout his life. He had the privilege of being leader

of Indian Business Delegations to various countries such as Japan,

Mauritius sharing even the dias with Hon'ble President of India

Mahamahim Pratibha Patil and Prime Ministers. The accused no.1

and 2 are very clever and unfair type of persons. They had

approached the said company and requested it to appoint them as

its brokers. The accused no.1 and 2 started nursing a grudge

against Raheja Developers Pvt Ltd and its Managing Director Mr.

Navin M Raheja. The accused no.1 and 2 started vaguely claiming

that the said company owed some odd amount to them. The said

claim of the accused no.1 and 2 was totally false. The accused no.1

and 2 wanted to restore their brokerage dealership with the said

company and extort money but the same was not acceptable to

the said company. The accused no.1 and 2 became very angry and

started threatening and intimidating the said company. They

hatched a conspiracy to extort money illegally by resorting to

threats, intimidation on the Internet. In Sep. 2011, they started

posting defamatory material on the internet. The accused no.1 and

2 enhanced their demand from Rs. 10 Lacs to Rs. 25 lacs failing

which threatened the said company to face further dire

consequences. On 4.10.2011 vide an e.mail, addressed to Naveen

2
 Vikas Arora Vs. Dr. Sanjay Sharma
--3--

Behal, accused no.1 and 2 with intention to degrade the good will

of the said company started raising demand which the claimed

was the brokerage for some units alleged to be booked in 2007-08.

The said bills presented to the company were not supported by

service tax and were not genuine. It is a common sense that no

genuine property broker will claim bills of property brokerage after

three years of the booking with clients. It is further averred that

accused no.1 and 2 are the Managing Directors of Qubit

Technologies which is a real estate brokerage firm based in

Gurugram. A perusal of the WHOIS records of www.qubrex.com

and other www.builderscoop.org. Shows that accused no.1 is the

registrant of the said domain names. The accused no.1 with

accused no.2 and one Sanjeev Kumar to extort money from the

company started exclusively targeting and exploiting Raheja

Builders by way of starting publishing which are highly

objectionable,defamatory, derogatory. The stories posted by the

accused is aimed at destroying the goodwill of the company. The

stories are visible and can be read on the websites. Tye accused

move on various websites further to those as attachments and

circulate them to high credible offices of even the Pirme Minister,

Chief Minister etc. In order to pressurize the company, the accused

have published the aforesaid baseless and false allegations.

Accused no.1 and 2 in an IT Professional and is astute in

manipulating and playing with postings. The accused have crated

such a mechanism that whenever any person makes a search for

M/s Raheja Developers Ltd. through these numerous false and

3
 Vikas Arora Vs. Dr. Sanjay Sharma
--4--

scandalous articles on various websites accused no.1 and 2

managed to post these materials on wikipedia an other public

websites. The accused started sending false allegations about the

chairman of the company about various projects of the company to

the booking holders as well as to its prospective buyers. After said

publication, the complainant received several phone calls from

friends, investors relatives etc. It is further alleged that nefarious

activities of the accused have caused loss and damage to the

reputation of crores of rupees of the company. In order to check

the nefarious activities, the accused had deputed Ms. Dimple

Bhardwaj, GM Corporate Communication for keeping an eye on the

defamatory material posted on different websites. She also

reported to the company that accused were demanding huge

money for removing defamatory contents. Further more the

accused no.1 had also threatened and intimidated the complainant

official Mr. Harinder Dhillon on phone on 24.11.2014 and

demanded that his company should now pay Rs. 40 Lacs to them if

the company wanted the accused to discontinue posting stories

about company. The accused no.1 and 2 are hand in glove with

accused no.3 and 4 who are intentionally and in conspiracy with

accused no.1 and 2 allowing their websites to be misused for

publishing false material against Raheja Developers and its

chairman. In order to blackmail and pressurize the company to pay

huge amount the accused circulated more abusive material by

concocting wrong and false stories and made caricatures of the

Managing Directors and others senior employees of the company.

4
 Vikas Arora Vs. Dr. Sanjay Sharma
--5--

It is further averred that accused have intentionally published

totally baseless articles with the sole intention of creating a false

impression Badmash company and its manging Directors is a fraud

person in the minds of General Public. The tone and tenor of the

articles published by the accused is highly abusive and abusive

defamatory aimed at ridiculing the complainant The accused have

misused the websites and intention with malafide notice so

causing defamation and extortion to the company of the

complainant and its official. The accused no.1 is assisted in his

malafide designs by his associates including Sonia Vaid who are

actively involved in circulating defamatory emails in furtherance of

their conspiracy to extort money by blackmailing the company

inspite of the fact that accused are neither booking holders nor

investors or stake holders in the company and therefore they have

committed offences punishable u/s 353/355/383/384/387/

388/389/465//468/469/499/500/501/503/506/507 IPC. Many

acquaintance and relatives of the complainant have started

doubting and questioning even the integrity and honesty of the

complainant due to publication of the wholly scandalous and

defamatory material. The complainant has been unnecessarily

defamed in the society and has suffered huge loss of reputation

and injury. All the accused are jointly and severally liable and

responsible of committing various offences in conspiracy with each

others and by indulging in mud slinging and character

assassination and they are liable to face consequences with each

5
 Vikas Arora Vs. Dr. Sanjay Sharma
--6--

others. Hence it is prayed that accused persons be summoned for

the offences u/s 353/355/383/384/387/388/389/465/468

/469/499/500/501/503/506/507/120-B and 34 of IPC.

2- The complainant in his preliminary evidence placed on

the oral testimony of the following witnesses.

CW-1: Vikash Arora

3. Thereafter the complainant has closed the preliminary

evidence on 5.11.2015.

The complainant also placed on record certain

documents.

Ex.P1: Certificate of Incorporation

Ex.P2: Certificate of Registration

Ex. P3: Certificate of Incorporation

Ex.P4: PAN card of Vikas Arora

Ex.P5: Appointment of letter of Mr. Arora

Ex.P6-10: Copies of articles of award

Ex.P10A-G:Letter from Qubrex to Raheja

Certificate dated 23.6.2015.

Ex.P11: Status of Qubrex.com on social media

Ex.P12: Domain registration of accused no.3.

Ex.P13-26: Defamatory articles against the

complainant.

Ex.P27-29: Defamatory E.mails

4- The Ld. Counsel for the complainant thereafter closed

the preliminary evidence on 16.11.2015.

5. It is argued by Ld. counsel for complainant that accused

no.1 and 2 were the broker of M/s Raheja Developers Pvt ltd. As

6
 Vikas Arora Vs. Dr. Sanjay Sharma
--7--

accused no1 and 2 were not fare and genuine so their brokerage

from the company seized in the year 2008. Accused no.1 and 2

having grudge against Raheja Developers due to abovesaid

reasons and they started to harass pressurize and blackmail the

said company by way of posting malicious, scandalous and

defamatory language against company on social media. It is

argued that accused no.3 is the company of accused no.1 and he

also posted defamatory statement against Raheja developers Pvt

Ltd and its director which clearly shows that accused no.1 and 2

has committed the offence of defamation. It is argued that

through their IT professional accused no.1 And 2 also published

defamatory language against Ms. Raheje Developers Pvt ltd and

official website of Wikipedia and in this regard complainant also

wrote several requests letters to Wikipedia to remove defamatory

contents against the Raheja Developers and its M.D but

Wikipedia failed to do so and due to that reason accused no.4 i.e.

wikipedia also liable for summoning. With these submissions

Ld.counsel for complainant submitted that it is a clear cut case of

defamation. It is argued that this court also sought police report u/s

210 Cr.P.C and the police has also reported that accused are

resorting to blackmail and defamatory tactics for recovering money

from the company. With these submission request is made that

accused be summoned for the offence as mentioned in the

complaint to face the trial.

In support of its contention Ld counsel for complainant

has placed reliance upon authorities reported as Subramanian

7
 Vikas Arora Vs. Dr. Sanjay Sharma
--8--

Swamy Vs. Union of India Ministry of Law 2016(2) RCR

Criminal 840, Sewakram Vs.RK Karanjiya AIR 1981 SC 1514,

M.N Damani Vs SK Sinha AIR 2001 SC 2037 Romesh

Chander Vs. The State 1965 PLR 877 Balraj Khanna vs.

Moti Ram AIR 1971 SC 1389, Gour Chander Raut and others

Vs. Public Prosecutor AIR 1962 OR 197 and BRK Murthy Vs.

State of A.P 2013 CrL.J 1602.

6- I have heard the ld. Counsel for the complainant and

perused the case file very carefully. From the perusal of the case

file and evidence led by the complainant this court is of the view

that present complaint filed by Mr. Vikas Arora who is Assistant

General Manager Sales and Marketing of Raheja Developers Ltd as

reflected in his appointment letter Ex. P5. The basic element of

this complaint is that accused no.1 and 2 posted defamatory and

scandalous posts against Raheja developers Pvt ltd and its MD

on social media which is an offence punishable under Section 499

IPC. The grudge of accused no.1 and 2 against Raheja developers

Pvt Ltd is that their brokerage was cancelled by the company on

account of some issues. First of all it has to be seen that what is

the locus standi of the complainant to file the complaint. In all the

evidence/documents placed on file by the Ld. Counsel for

complainant in order to show that accused no.1 and 2

posted/published defamatory statements, name of complainant is

missing which shows that no defamatory/statement/posted by

accused no1 and 2 against the complainant. The case of the

complainant is also on the same footing is that defamatory

8
 Vikas Arora Vs. Dr. Sanjay Sharma
--9--

statement posted against M/s Raheja Developers Pvt ltd and its

director Mr. Naveen M Raheja. In this way, Mr. Naveen M.Raheja

has to file the present complaint and stepped into the witness box

in order to prove the fact that any defamatory statement was

posted by accused no.1 and 2 against him. But Mr. Naveen M

Rajeha is neither the complainant nor stepped into the witness box

as a witness in the present complaint. It is also pertinent to

mention here that Mr. Vikas Arora filed the present complaint in

the capacity of complainant and not in the capacity of authorised

person of Mr. Naveen M Rajeha. In these circumstances, no offence

committed against complainant as he has no locus standi to file the

present complaint. It is Mr. Naveen M Raheja who is the MD of the

Raheja Developer Pvt ltd who can prove the fact that any person

accused posted / used defamatory statements/ post against him

on social media and due to that reason, his image/reputation

shattered in the society but Mr. Naveen M Raheja not filed the

present complaint and this fact goes into the root of this complaint.

7. Further present complaint filed by the complainant u/s

352,355 IPC but it is not clear that how assault or criminal force

used by accused and by which accused. It is also not clear that

how complaint of the complainant covers definition of extortion

and how offence u/s 383/384/387/388/389 IPC is made out from

the mere perusal of the complaint as well as evidence led by the

complainant. Element of forgery also missing from the present

complaint so offence u/s 465468/469/IPC also not made out. It is

also not clear that what kind of cheating committed by accused

9
 Vikas Arora Vs. Dr. Sanjay Sharma
--10--

and by which accused. As regarding the offence u/s 499/501 IPC is

concerned, it is already discussed that complainant has no locus

standi to file the present complaint. There is no whisper in the

present complaint that who was criminally intimidated and by

which means so offence punishable under section 503/506/507 IPC

also not made out. No doubt from the perusal of the documents Ex.

P11 to Ex. P13 it is clear that Qubrex.com is registered in the

name of Sanjay Sharma who is accused no.1 in the present

complaint and on that website, statements are also published

against Raheja developers Pvt Ltd and Mr. Naveen M Raheha MD of

Raheja builders but answer to this question is also same that

complainant has no locus standi to raise this question before this

court by way of filing present complaint. In view of the entire

discussion above this court is of the considered opinion that there

are no sufficient ground to proceed against accused persons.

Hence the present complaint filed by the complainant is hereby

dismissed u/s 203 Cr.P.C. File be consigned to record room after

due compliance.

Pronounced: Davender
Judicial Magistrate Ist Class
Gurugram 16.8.2017

Note: All the ten pages of this order have

been duly checked and signed by me.

Davender
Judicial Magistrate Ist Class
Gurugram 16.8.2017
UID No. HR0330

1
 Vikas Arora Vs. Dr. Sanjay Sharma
--11--

Present: Complainant with Sh. M.K Dang Advocate.

Arguments heard on the point of summoning the

accused. Now to come upon after lunch break for orders on

summoning point.

Davender
JMIC/GGM
16.8.2017.

Present: Complainant with Sh. MK Dang Advocate.

Order pronounced. Vide my separate order of even date,

the present complaint filed by the complainant is hereby

dismissed under Section 203 Cr.P.C. File be consigned to record

room after due compliance.

Pronounced: Davender
Judicial Magistrate Ist Class,
Gurugram. 16.8.2017

1
 Vikas Arora Vs. Dr. Sanjay Sharma
--12--

Present: Complainant in person with Sh. MK Dang Advocate.

Arguments on the point of summoning heard. Now to come

upon after lunch for orders.

Davender
JMIC/Gurugram
16.8.2017.

Present: Complainant in person with Sh. MK Dang Advocate.

Order pronounced. Vide my separate order of even date, the

present complaint filed by the complainant is hereby dismissed

under Section 203 Cr.P.C. File be consigned to record room after

due compliance.

Pronounced: Davender
Judicial Magistrate Ist Class,
Gurugram. 16.8.2017