JUDGMENT 1. - The instant miscellaneous petition has been preferred by the petitioners seeking quashing of the F.I.R. No. 4/2012 registered at P.S. Sangaria. 2. The complainant Smt. Sheela filed a complaint in the A.C.J.M., Sangaria alleging inter alia that the local agent of Priya Home Study Pvt. Ltd. came to her on 29.8.2009 and induced her to invest a sum of Rs. 12,000/- in their company Priya Home Study Pvt. Ltd. The complainant alleged that she was assured that she shall receive Rs. 60,000/- cash. She further alleged that she was provided a Member Security Certificate issued by the company Priya Home Study Pvt. Ltd. and a receipt. The complainant allegedly tried to contact the accused but they fled away after closing the office. The complainant alleged that as she was not paid the amount of Rs. 60,000/- the accused committing the offences under Sections 406, 420 I.P.C. The complaint was forwarded to the Police Station Sangaria where F.I.R. 4/2012 was registered and investigation commenced. The petitioners have now approached this Court seeking quashing of the F.I.R. mentioned above. 3. Mr. R.S. Choudhary, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case. He urged that the petitioners' company was incorporated for providing computer education to the consumers. He further urged that the complainant was also promised at the time of investing Rs. 12,000/- that either he or any other member of the family could be provided that education as promised at the time of the investment. Learned counsel placing reliance on certain documents filed along with the petition submitted that the security certificate which was issued to the complainant is clear to the effect that the company provided insurance cover to the members and offer was also given to take the membership under the rapid growth pool entitling him to receive Rs. 60,000/- as per growth of the company. Learned counsel submits that the company could not get the requisite growth, therefore, the amount was not paid to the complainant. He submits that number of persons enrolled in the company were provided the promised amount but thereafter the police has seized the company's records and that is why the complainant could not be reimbursed his amount. He thus urged that the F.I.R. impugned does not disclose any offence and the same is liable to be quashed. 4. He submits that number of persons enrolled in the company were provided the promised amount but thereafter the police has seized the company's records and that is why the complainant could not be reimbursed his amount. He thus urged that the F.I.R. impugned does not disclose any offence and the same is liable to be quashed. 4. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor submitted that on a bare perusal of the Security Certificate filed by the petitioner's counsel on record, it would be apparent that scheme which was floated by the company was a bogus scheme and was in the nature of a money circulation scheme created for cheating the public at large. The complainant was asked to enroll members and on enrollment of the members, a certain sum was promised to him. Learned Public Prosecutor submits that the very condition which have been mentioned in the security certificate clearly show that the accused intended to cheat the complainant and nothing beyond that. He further submitted that number of cases of similar nature have been registered against the petitioners at various places in Rajasthan and therein the police has already filed charge-sheet against the accused. He submitted that it is a case of mass scale cheating and the valid prosecution should not stifled at this stage. He thus urged that the F.I.R. impugned is not fit to be interfered with. 5. Heard and considered the arguments advanced at the bar. Perused the F.I.R. impugned and the documents filed by the counsel for the petitioner on record. A perusal of the F.I.R. clearly shows that the complainant was given a fraudulent inducement and was made to part with certain money. Despite the lapse of 5 years period settled in the security certificate, the complainant was not paid the promised amount. The document which has been relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner clearly recites the conditions which being the whole scheme in the purview of a banned chit fund scheme. The complainant was promised various benefits on enrolling more subscribers. Therefore, it is apparent that the whole scheme which was set up by the accused was bogus design intended to cheat the public at large. Similar cases are reported to have been registered against the petitioners at various places in Rajasthan and in most of them the accused were arrested and charge-sheets have been filed. Therefore, it is apparent that the whole scheme which was set up by the accused was bogus design intended to cheat the public at large. Similar cases are reported to have been registered against the petitioners at various places in Rajasthan and in most of them the accused were arrested and charge-sheets have been filed. Thus, this Court is of the opinion that it is not fit case for exercising inherent powers to quash the F.I.R. at the inception.In view of the aforesaid discussion the miscellaneous petition being bereft of any force is rejected.Petition dismissed. *******