Vijay Bishnoi, J.

This criminal misc. petition under section 482 CrPC has been filed by the petitioners with a prayer for quashing the FIR No.222/2014 dated 22.09.2014 of Police Station, Shashtri Nagar, Jodhpur for the offences punishable under sections 406, 420, 464, 467, 471 and 120-B IPC.

2. Brief facts of the case are that respondent No.2 filed a written complaint in the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate No.7, Jodhpur Metropolitan and the said complaint was forwarded by the concerned Magistrate for investigation under section 156(3) CrPC, which resulted into lodging of the impugned FIR.

3. In the complaint, respondent No.2 has alleged that he and the petitioners are known to each other. In March, 2014, the petitioners approached him and asked that they entered into a transaction for purchasing a big land in village Pal, District Jodhpur and for that purpose, they need some money for a period of one or two months, upon which the respondent No.2 agreed, and on 03.03.2014 and 04.03.2014, he advanced a sum of Rs. 1 crore each, total Rs. 3 crore as loan to the petitioners and the petitioners had agreed to pay the interest on the said loan amount at the rate of 24% per annum. It is further contended in the complaint that on 25.03.2014 when the petitioners were in need of more money in relation to land transaction, the complainant further advanced Rs. 2 crores through RTGS to one Pukhraj Sargara on their instructions. It is contended in the complaint that when respondent No.2 had demanded interest amount for the month of March on the loan amount, the petitioners assured to pay the same at the earliest, however, when the petitioners did not pay the interest amount despite repeated requests, some doubt was created in the mind of the complainant and when he warned the petitioners to take action, they approached him and informed that land transaction done by them has not been completed and, therefore, they are not in a position to pay the interest amount. Upon this, the respondent No.2 insisted them to pay the interest amount any how, then the petitioners offered to sell some part of the land, which they purchased, and assured him that they are ready to sell the land to him on the same cost, on which they had purchased it from the original owners. It is alleged that though for quite some time, the respondent No.2 did not agree with the offer of the petitioners but due to constant pressure of the petitioners and looking to the situation that the interest amount would not come, he agreed to enter into an agreement to purchase some part of the land and for that purpose, the petitioners executed an agreement in favour of him and his wife on 03.06.2014. The agreement dated 03.06.2014 is in relation to 19% of share in the land and the money paid to the petitioners was shown as consideration and it was also agreed that after making the payment to the original owner, the land would be sold and respondent No.2 would get good profit.

4. It is stated in the complaint that as per the agreement, it was also agreed that if on any count, the earlier agreement executed between the petitioners and the original owner is cancelled and resulted in any loss, then the same would be suffered by the petitioners only and the complainant and his wife would not be responsible for any loss and the petitioners would either give them piece of land or would return the money.

5. It is alleged that the petitioners had not demanded the balance of money from the respondent No.2 as per the terms of agreement dated 03.06.2014 and also not informed him about the progress in the land transaction between the petitioners and original owners. Looking to these circumstances when the respondent No.2 asked the petitioners to get the deed executed in their favour from the original owners as per the agreement dated 03.06.2014, they deferred the same on one or other excuse and at this point of time, some doubts were again cropped in the mind of respondent No.2, then he issued