How to file fir bpo fraud person How to file fir bpo fraud person

We are private limited company,we came into digital marketing and gaming feild in the end of 2017.We are from Andhra Pradsh.In search of projects for our company we came across a BPO project advertisement on internet.We contact the person with whom the ad involves,he is from Kolkata after contacting he asked the project costs about 2.70 lakhs and ask us to pay that online instead of that we asked him that we are about to visit kolkata and after that we took his pan copy and paid 2.70 lakhs to the consultant.After we came into project but after continuing of projects for seven months he does not paid single rupee for the contract until now.Instead of non paying he is treating us that he will send goons if we asked
for money.Later on we came to know that he is collecting lots of money from many centers by the name of projects.We lost about 18lakhs in terms of billings because of him and also getting criminal intimidation.Also when i tried to do fir on this police man asking how to file fir I have proper legal aggrementation,mails,discussions,call recordings,Chats on the payment.Please help me how to sort the things through legal action and file FIR on him.Police man asking me on which parameter can they file Fir.Please help me how to file fir and help me to pick up the person from the police man.

Kishan Dutt Kalaskar Retired Judge

Responded 3 years ago

View All Answers
A.Dear Sir,
You may lodge complaint with both the Police Commissioners of both States in writing and by sending through register post with all required documents.

Please have PAID phone call with me through VIDHIKARYA and get more guidance.
Helpful
Helpful
Share

Post Your Matter Post Your Matter

Talk to a Lawyer Talk to a Lawyer

Ask a question Ask a question

Vidhi Samaadhaan Vidhi Samaadhaan

Suneel Moudgil

Responded 3 years ago

A.1. You are advised to contact a local lawyer along with complete relevant documents and discuss the matter thoroughly and act accordingly,
2. you would need to file an FIR and if the police refuse to lodge the FIR approach the concerned Court as envisaged under section 156(3) of CrPC,
Helpful
Helpful
Share

Post Your Matter Post Your Matter

Talk to a Lawyer Talk to a Lawyer

Ask a question Ask a question

Vidhi Samaadhaan Vidhi Samaadhaan

Jagannath S Pawar

Responded 3 years ago

A.You need good lawyer who can draft and follow your case. It should be initiated from lodging of FIR. Thanks . If need b plz contact through Vidhikarya
Helpful
Helpful
Share

Post Your Matter Post Your Matter

Talk to a Lawyer Talk to a Lawyer

Ask a question Ask a question

Vidhi Samaadhaan Vidhi Samaadhaan

Read Related Answers

question iconmy company didn't paid one month with 15 days notice period salary
You can send a legal notice to your company with the help of an advocate for paying your due salary and if the company fails to pay you then you may sue the said company.
question iconWhat happened if we not pay the Notice period Recovery amount to company
Dear Sir, They may not go Court for recovery of the same but they resist to issue relieving letter and they will be danger of giving bad feedback to your new employer. They cannot lodge any police complaint as it is not a criminal case.
question iconResignation before the Company contract ends
Dear Sir, You need not any penalty unless there is a service bond executed by you. ================================================================== Remedies available to employer and employee on breach of service bond In the event of breach of employment bond, the employer might incur a loss and, therefore, may be entitled for compensation.4 However, the compensation awarded should be reasonable to compensate the loss incurred and should not exceed the penalty, if any, stipulated in the contract.5 Usually, the court determines the reasonable compensation amount by computing the actual loss incurred by the employer having regard to all circumstances of the case. Even if the bond stipulates payment of any penalty amount in the event of breach, it does not mean that the employer shall be entitled to receive the stipulated amount in full as compensation on the occurrence of such default; rather the employer shall be entitled only for reasonable compensation as determined by the court. While exploring alternate remedies available to the employer in the event of default by the employee, it would be interesting and worthwhile to discuss whether the employers are entitled to seek for reinstatement of their employee or obtain restraining order against the employee from joining any competitor/alternate employer because many such similar reliefs have been sought by the employers in various suits. The apex court, while dealing with similar query, has held that the specific performance action cannot be sought for breach of contract of personal service or bond6 and, therefore, the employer shall not be entitled to seek for reinstatement of their employees as relief in the event of breach of bond. In another matter, the apex court has held that it is not bound to grant an injunction in every case and an injunction to enforce a negative covenant would be refused if it would indirectly compel the employee to idleness or to serve the employer7 and, therefore, the courts are also reluctant to grant injunction against the employees restricting their employment with other employer unless it is necessary for the protection proprietary interests or trade secrets of the employer. As mentioned, the conditions stipulated in the employment bond should be reasonable in order to be valid and, therefore, even if unreasonable condition/clauses are stipulated in the contract such as imposing exorbitant duration of compulsory employment period or huge penalty upon the employee, the court shall award compensation only if it determines that the employer has incurred loss by such breach of contract. The court normally considers the actual expenses incurred by the employer, the period of service by the employee, conditions stipulated in the contract to determine the loss incurred by the employer to arrive at the reasonable compensation amount. For instance, in the case of Sicpa India Limited v ShriManasPratim Deb,8 the plaintiff had incurred expenses of INR 67,595 towards imparting training to the defendant for which an employment bond was executed under which the defendant had agreed to serve the plaintiff company for a period of three years or to make a payment of INR 200,000. The employee left the employment within a period of two years. To enforce the agreement the employer went to the court, which awarded a sum of INR 22,532 as compensation for breach of contract by the employee. It is crucial to note that though the bond stipulates a payment of INR 200,000 as compensation for breach of contract, the judge had considered the total expenses incurred by the employer and the employee's period of service while deciding the compensation amount. Since the defendant had already completed two years of service out of the agreed three year period, the judge divided the total expenses of INR 67,595 incurred by the plaintiff into three equal parts for three years period and awarded a sum of INR 22,532 as reasonable compensation for leaving the employment a year before the agreed time period. Similarly, the High Court of Andhra Pradesh in the case of Satyam Computers v Leela Ravichander,9had also reduced the compensation amount considering the period of service of the employee. In view of the aforesaid discussions and various court decisions, the employment bond is considered to be reasonable as it is necessary to protect the interests of the employer. However, the restrains stipulated upon the employee in the said contract should be "reasonable" and "necessary" to safeguard the interests of the employer or else the validity of the bond may be questioned. The employees are always free to decide their employment and they cannot be compelled to work for any employer by enforcing the employment bond. The court can; however, issue order restricting the employment of the employee only if the said action is deemed necessary to safeguard the trade secrets/proprietary interest of the employer. In the event of breach of contract by the employee, the only remedy available to the employer is to obtain a reasonable compensation amount. The compensation amount awarded shall be based upon the actual loss incurred by the employer by such breach.
question iconI have been asked to payback the Hike what they have provided last year.
Dear Sir, Remedies available to employer and employee on breach of service bond In the event of breach of employment bond, the employer might incur a loss and, therefore, may be entitled for compensation.4 However, the compensation awarded should be reasonable to compensate the loss incurred and should not exceed the penalty, if any, stipulated in the contract.5 Usually, the court determines the reasonable compensation amount by computing the actual loss incurred by the employer having regard to all circumstances of the case. Even if the bond stipulates payment of any penalty amount in the event of breach, it does not mean that the employer shall be entitled to receive the stipulated amount in full as compensation on the occurrence of such default; rather the employer shall be entitled only for reasonable compensation as determined by the court. While exploring alternate remedies available to the employer in the event of default by the employee, it would be interesting and worthwhile to discuss whether the employers are entitled to seek for reinstatement of their employee or obtain restraining order against the employee from joining any competitor/alternate employer because many such similar reliefs have been sought by the employers in various suits. The apex court, while dealing with similar query, has held that the specific performance action cannot be sought for breach of contract of personal service or bond6 and, therefore, the employer shall not be entitled to seek for reinstatement of their employees as relief in the event of breach of bond. In another matter, the apex court has held that it is not bound to grant an injunction in every case and an injunction to enforce a negative covenant would be refused if it would indirectly compel the employee to idleness or to serve the employer7 and, therefore, the courts are also reluctant to grant injunction against the employees restricting their employment with other employer unless it is necessary for the protection proprietary interests or trade secrets of the employer. As mentioned, the conditions stipulated in the employment bond should be reasonable in order to be valid and, therefore, even if unreasonable condition/clauses are stipulated in the contract such as imposing exorbitant duration of compulsory employment period or huge penalty upon the employee, the court shall award compensation only if it determines that the employer has incurred loss by such breach of contract. The court normally considers the actual expenses incurred by the employer, the period of service by the employee, conditions stipulated in the contract to determine the loss incurred by the employer to arrive at the reasonable compensation amount. For instance, in the case of Sicpa India Limited v ShriManasPratim Deb,8 the plaintiff had incurred expenses of INR 67,595 towards imparting training to the defendant for which an employment bond was executed under which the defendant had agreed to serve the plaintiff company for a period of three years or to make a payment of INR 200,000. The employee left the employment within a period of two years. To enforce the agreement the employer went to the court, which awarded a sum of INR 22,532 as compensation for breach of contract by the employee. It is crucial to note that though the bond stipulates a payment of INR 200,000 as compensation for breach of contract, the judge had considered the total expenses incurred by the employer and the employee's period of service while deciding the compensation amount. Since the defendant had already completed two years of service out of the agreed three year period, the judge divided the total expenses of INR 67,595 incurred by the plaintiff into three equal parts for three years period and awarded a sum of INR 22,532 as reasonable compensation for leaving the employment a year before the agreed time period. Similarly, the High Court of Andhra Pradesh in the case of Satyam Computers v Leela Ravichander,9had also reduced the compensation amount considering the period of service of the employee. In view of the aforesaid discussions and various court decisions, the employment bond is considered to be reasonable as it is necessary to protect the interests of the employer. However, the restrains stipulated upon the employee in the said contract should be "reasonable" and "necessary" to safeguard the interests of the employer or else the validity of the bond may be questioned. The employees are always free to decide their employment and they cannot be compelled to work for any employer by enforcing the employment bond. The court can; however, issue order restricting the employment of the employee only if the said action is deemed necessary to safeguard the trade secrets/proprietary interest of the employer. In the event of breach of contract by the employee, the only remedy available to the employer is to obtain a reasonable compensation amount. The compensation amount awarded shall be based upon the actual loss incurred by the employer by such breach.
question iconLegal Notice - I have joined HCL technologies
Companies cannot force you to serve the full notice period. As they are refusing to relieve you (maybe because you had agreed upon the 'notice period' clause in your employment agreement), you might have to pay damages to the management. However, the management has no right to retain even after payment of the damages as per the agreement. Thereafter, you should issue a written notice to the management by communicating about further development and requesting your relieving letter. If your employer intentionally dragging your case to issue a relieving letter, then you may consider moving it to the High Court under Article 226 read with Article 14.