Criminal proceedings cannot be quashed solely due to the existence of civil remedies; prima facie evidence of criminal offenses warrants trial.

JUDGMENT :

UDAY KUMAR, J.

1. This revisional application, preferred by Iltaf Khan (hereinafter referred to as "the Petitioner"), invokes the inherent powers of this Court under Section 528 read with Section 442 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (provisions pari materia with Section 482 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973) seeks to quash the ongoing criminal proceedings, registered as G.R. Case No. 3313 of 2014, which originated from Bhaktinagar Police Station Case No. 597 of 2024, dated July 5, 2024, under Sections 420 (cheating) and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code, 1908, and are presently pending before the Court of the Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalpaiguri.

2. The Petitioner's core contention is that the entire dispute fundamentally stems from a commercial transaction, thereby rendering it purely civil in nature. His implication, it is contended, constitutes a patent abuse of the legal process, designed primarily to recover a commercial debt under the guise of criminal prosecution.

3. The genesis of the present dispute lies in a commercial transaction dating back to January 13, 2024, when the Opposite Party No. 2, Shahnaz Banu, proprietor of "Build World" (the de facto complainant), supplied goods to the Petitioner's firm "M.K. PIONEER amounting to Rs. 19,20,920/- (Rupees Nineteen Lakhs Twenty Thousand Nine Hundred and Twenty only)" but Petitioner largely defaulted in payment of the said outstanding amount despite the substantial supply and repeated demands for payment, except partial payment of Rs. 2,00,000/ (Rupees Two Lakhs) on 4th March, 2024 and returning of goods to Opposite Party No.2 – complainant worth Rs. 2,41,975/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Forty-One Thousand Nine Hundred Seventy-Five) on 24th June, 2024. when the complainant demanded the said outstanding amount of Rs. 14,89,245/- (Rupees Fourteen Lakhs Eighty-Nine Thousand Two Hundred Forty- Five), the Petitioner, far from settling the dues, resorted to threats Opposite Party No.2.

4. Following the Petitioner's alleged failure to clear the dues and his purported resort to threats and intimidation, Shahnaz Banu issued a legal notice on May 10, 2024, demanding the outstanding amount. Subsequently, on July 5, 2024, the complainant lodged a formal complaint with Bhaktinagar Police Station, which led to the registration of FIR No. 597/2024 under Sections 420 and 506 IPC.

5. Subsequent to the registration of FIR, the Petitioner voluntarily surrendered on September 24, 2024, and was duly enlarged on bail. Upon conclusion of the investigation, a charge-sheet (No. 688/2024) was duly filed by the police on September 30, 2024 under Sections 420, 506 of IPC against the petitioner. Finally, on November 14, 2024, the Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalpaiguri, took cognizance of the offenses, initiating G.R. Case No. 3313 of 2024, which is now sought to be quashed. This continuum of events and the resultant impugned proceeding that stands challenged in the instant revisional application.

6. Mr. Muhammad Obaid, Learned Advocate appearing for the Petitioner, vehemently contended that the very genesis of the existing dispute is intrinsically a business transaction. He submitted with considerable force that the criminal proceedings initiated qua the Petitioner constitute a blatant and improper attempt to recover a commercial debt by cloaking a civil dispute with a criminal colour. Mr. Obaid underscored that the quintessential element of dishonest intention (mens rea) a