The central legal point established in the judgment is the need for fraudulent, dishonest, or deceptive inducements to criminalize breaches, emphasizing the distinction between civil disputes and criminal offenses.

JUDGMENT :

RAJANI DUBEY, J.

1. The matter is taken up for hearing on I.A. No. 01/2019, for grant of interim relief/stay.

2. The petitioner, in this application, prayed for restraining the respondents not to proceed further in respect of impugned FIR No. 32/2019 registered on 20.02.2019 for the offence punishable under Sections 406, 420, 120-B and 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short the IPC) at Police Station-Mulmula, District Janjgir-Champa and also seeks direction against respondents not to take any further steps against the petitioners in pursuance to the registration of FIR.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner has filed this petition under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (for short the Cr.P.C.) for quashing the impugned FIR registered against them. The petitioner No. 1-M/s. KSK Mahanadi Power Company Limited (earlier known as Wardha Power Company Limited-CG Project) (for short ‘the Company’) is a Public Limited Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 having its registered office at Plot No. 431/A, Road No. 22, Jubille Hills, Hyderabad and its power plant is coal based set up at Nariyara, District Janjgir-Champa, (C.G.) and the petitioner Nos. 3, 5 and 6 are the Director of the Company, whereas petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 were the former Directors of the Company and they are no longer with the Company as they have tendered their resignation on 27.08.2018 and 04.10.2018 respectively. Learned counsel further submits that the Petitioner's Company engaged respondent No. 2 for Active Mine Management and Open market Coal Supply Services to the Power Plant being operated by the Company for that proper work orders have been issued, invoices were raised and payments were made from time to time as is evident from the documents, resulting a business worth approximately Rs. 400/- crore for respondent No. 2. It is also submitted that due to financial crisis being faced by the entire thermal power sector companies in India, the Company faced with severe restriction of cash flow and could not clear some bills raised by respondent No. 2 and the amount became outstanding. In the meanwhile, certain disputes also arose between the parties with regarding to outstanding amount. In order to get the outstanding amount cleared, the respondent No. 2, on 27.09.2017, raised a Demand Notice under Section 8 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (for short ‘IBC’) demanding payment of Rs. 17,74,51,624/- with interest @ 18% vide Annexure P/3. Learned counsel for the petitioners also submits that the Demand Notice dated 27.09.2017 of respondent No. 2 was disputed by the Petitioner's Company on the ground that it did not fulfill the requisites criteria of various work orders and purchase orders issued by the Company such as the non-supply of quantum of coal specified under each work order/purchase order or the quality of coal supplied or the penalties to be for short delivery etc. Thereafter, the Company further issued work and purchased orders irrespective of the Demand Note and the respondent No. 2 were still working on those orders, out of which some are pending. The Company again raised a dispute with regard to payment of money to the tune of Rs. 2,70,62,314/- which was not accounted for by respondent No. 2 in the total outstanding amount. It has been also submitted that the Company in order to get the dispute resolved requested the respondent No. 2 to come forward and reconcile the differences and disputes with regard to outstanding amount but respondent No. 2 never responded to the Company's request. It is settled between the parties to the contract on the bars of which the present case is governed by multiple work orders. Each and all of them are governed by an Arbitration Clause (Annexure P/4). Subsequently, the responded No. 2, in the capacity of an Operational Creditor, on 07.03.2018, filed an application under Section 9 of the IBC against the petitioner's company at the National Company l