Wellness Therapist Or Tinder Date? Karnataka High Court Refuses To Quash Proceedings Against Woman Accused Of Online Cheating

The Karnataka High Court has said the government should come up with some regulatory measures to check the growth of therapists, who offer their services online including via social media.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna observed, "It is in public domain that there are huge mushrooming of so called therapies and therapists on social media i.e., Instagram, Twitter or Facebook as the case would be, wherein therapists pose themselves to be in the field of any therapy. It is also in public domain that they are all pseudo-therapists who are "instagram influencers".

The court added there are many people on social media, who claim to be therapists but are not bound by any ethics or regulated by any norms.

"Cases of this nature have begun to emerge in large proportions here people wanting to get some therapy fall prey to such pseudo-therapists. Therefore, it is time that the Government comes up with some regulatory measure to check the growth of such therapists."

The observations were made by the court while dismissing a petition filed by a woman, who is accused of offences punishable under Sections 66(C), 66(D) and 67(A) of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and Sections 419 and 420 of the IPC. She had sought quashing of the proceedings pending before an Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate in Bangalore.

The FIR:

It was alleged by the complainant Shankar Ganesh P J, who is an IT professional, that he came in contact with the petitioner - Sanjana Fernandes alias Raveera, on the dating app Tinder.

According to the complaint, on a particular night when they were on chat, he claimed to be completely stressed and expressed it to Fernandes. She in response told him that she has an Instagram page "positivity-for-a-360-life" and claimed to be Wellness Therapist who promotes general well being of mind, body and soul.

The man went on transferring money to her account after "on a class to class basis" during the period of COVID-19 lockdown. The classes took place on Instagram.

However, the story took a turn when the man got interested in meeting the woman in person and started sending lewd messages to her.

He also allegedly sent indecent messages containing pornography and other material to the woman, resulting in she blocking his account.

Peeved at her reaction, the man began to dig into the veracity of the therapy that the woman claimed and found out that she had 15 such profiles of Instagram and other social media.

He then registered a complaint against the woman for the offence of cheating and the offence under the Information Technology Act, leading to registration of the FIR.

Findings:

The bench on going through the chargesheet noted that the petitioner - the accused, initially sent a message to the complainant - the man, on Tinder and later they communicated on Instagram.

Then the court went through the consent form signed by the complainant before joining the therapy sessions.

It said, "The complainant has no doubt signed the consent form but that does not mean that the petitioner can escape the clutches of law merely because the complainant has signed the consent form. There is no document or rather is an admitted fact that the petitioner has no qualification to be in the field of any kind of wellness therapy as projected. It is her own generated web page, without any qualification. Therefore it is a case where the petitioner without any substance or qualification lured the customers into the web of wellness therapy through the web page."

Commenting on the chats, the court said it was the accused who lured the complainant into the wellness therapy. It added that the police investigation has revealed that she has several such web pages in different names.

"In fact the name of the petitioner is not even divulged in the therapy that she has administered upon the complainant in the subject petition. Therefore, it becomes necessary for a trial for the petitioner to come out clean," said the court.

The court further said the accused is required to come out clean as the offences alleged against her are punishable under Section 419 (cheating by personation) IPC and Section 420 (Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property) IPC.

It observed, "The chats would reveal that the petitioner had initially represented that she is a wellness therapist and her team would take care of the complainant. Therefore, without having any team or any qualification whatsoever, it was the web page prima facie created to lure the complainant and the like. It is therefore, the offence of cheating comes clearly made out against the petitioner."

The court also said that offences alleged are the one punishable under the Information Technology Act.

"An entry in the complaint or the summary of the charge sheet clearly makes out an offence that would become ingredients of Sections 66(C) & (D) and 67(A) of the Information Technology Act and these are in the realm of seriously disputed questions of fact," it said.

The court also noted that the woman has registered a case against the man for sending him lewd messages and the same is pending adjudication.

Finally the court held, "I do not find any warrant to interfere with the case on hand as the petitioner has not demonstrated by production of such unimpeachable evidence of sterling character for this Court to interfere or interject the proceedings in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 of the CrPC."

It added: "Since the wellness therapy has generated such illness as is complained of by the complainant and finding no merit in the petition, the petition stands dismissed"

Case Title: SANJANA FERNANDES @ RAVEERA v. STATE OF KARNATAKA