High Court refuses to quash FIRs in Gurugram education scam case

Justice says power to quash complaint must be used only in rare cases, finds “no merit” in plea by Gurgaon man accused of duping youth

The court said serious allegations warrant full investigation and cannot be brushed aside at the FIR stage.

The Punjab and Haryana High Court dismissed a plea to quash FIRs against consultant Ranadeep Ghosal, accused of defrauding students seeking admission in Germany.

“The power under Section 482 of the CrPC must be exercised sparingly, with caution and in rare cases,” said Justice Jasjit Singh Bedi of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, dismissing a petition seeking the quashing of multiple FIRs against a Gurgaon-based education consultant accused of defrauding youth who wanted to study in Germany.

In his November 18 order, Justice Bedi made it clear that, “At the stage of quashing of an FIR, a mini trial is not to be conducted… reliability or genuineness of the allegations cannot be gone into. Disputed questions of fact or the defence of an accused cannot be looked into. An FIR should be quashed in exceptional circumstances where absolutely no offence is made out”.

The petition was filed by Ranadeep Ghosal, who faces twelve FIRs registered between 2019 and 2021 in Gurugram, Panipat, Fatehgarh Sahib, and Chandigarh, alleging cheating, forgery, and criminal conspiracy. The complaints accuse Ghosal and associates of collecting large sums from families on the promise of German university admissions, while providing fake letters and receipts, and failing to secure placements or accommodations as promised.

Story continues below this ad

During the hearing, Ghosal’s counsel argued that the disputes were civil in nature and that Ghosal was not a company director but merely a paid employee. However, the court pointed to specific allegations, emails, and financial records indicating that Ghosal controlled the companies, handled their accounts, and issued instructions to staff.

The order also noted that a German firm had initiated arbitration against the petitioner, and an award found he had registered domain names similar to the well-known German entity, with the intent to mislead customers. Justice Bedi said the victims had been lured with false promises, and the offences alleged against the petitioner and his co-accused were “prima facie made out.”

Refusing to interfere in the investigation, the judge relied on Supreme Court precedents affirming that courts should allow police to complete probes when a cognizable offence is disclosed. “Quashing of a complaint or FIR should be an exception rather than an ordinary rule,” the order stated, reiterating that courts are not to “embark upon an enquiry as to the reliability or genuineness” of FIR allegations at this stage.

The petition was dismissed, with Justice Bedi finding “no merit” in Ghosal’s plea. Pending applications connected to the case were also disposed of.