ORDER :

Mr. Ashok Kumar Jain, J. - The present Misc. Petition has been preferred under Section 482 Cr.P.C. by the petitioner for quashing of the FIR No.269/2018 registered at the Police Station Kotwali, District Pali for the offences under Sections 420 , 406, 467, 468 and 471 of the IPC.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that language of FIR itself indicates that Rs.2 lacs was borrowed by the petitioner from the respondent on certain rate of interest and when he asked to repay the same, the petitioner refused and denied the alleged of transaction. He submitted that on face of it, this is dispute of civil nature and criminal proceedings in such case is not permissible. He further submitted that just to extract money by entangling the present petitioner in criminal proceedings is nothing but an abuse of process of law. He further submitted that prima facie no case under Sections 420 , 406, 467, 468 and 471 of the IPC is made out against the petitioner. He further submitted that after submission of final report before the court concerned, the same was sent for re-investigation and now again petitioner is forced to join the investigation. He further submitted that a civil suit has already been filed to recover the aforesaid debt, which is pending for adjudication thus, the criminal proceeding is just an abuse of process of law, therefore, by way of filing petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., petitioner has made a prayer for quashing of the criminal proceedings.

3. Aforesaid contentions were opposed by the learned Public Prosecutor as well as learned counsel for the complainant-respondent No.2. Learned counsel for the respondent No.2 submitted that when a notice of demand was issued and served upon the petitioner then the petitioner not only denied the transaction but also retracted the execution of 'rukka/note'. He further submitted that the present petitioner has not only denied alleged transaction but also the documentary evidence as well, which amounts to causing wrongful loss to respondent-complainant with wrongful gain and misappropriation of funds by the petitioner. He further submitted that if a civil suit is pending even then a criminal case can be registered and defendant of civil suit can be tried as an accused in any criminal case. He further submitted that no case for quashing of criminal proceedings is made out as prayed by the petitioner.

4. Heard learned counsel for petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for respondent No.2. Perused the material available on record.

5. Perusal of the report available on record indicates that respondent-complainant filed a complaint before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate and after the order under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C., a case was registered by the police station Kotwali, District Pali. After investigation, the matter was found to be of civil nature and Final Report was submitted by the police before the court concerned but the said Final Report was sent for re-investigation and for examination of signature on Rukka/note by the Forensic Science Laboratory. Thereafter, the police called the present petitioner for production of documents under Section 91 Cr.P.C. but petitioner did not cooperated in the investigation and he had not produced any documents.

6. On bare look at the allegation made in the FIR reveals that both the parties were carrying on a business and on the date specifically mentioned in the complaint, certain amount was taken as loan on specified rate of interest for a term fixed therein. It was further revealed that after receiving the loan amount from complainant-respondent, a rukka/note or a promissory note, whatsoever it may be, the loan agreement was allegedly executed by the petitioner. The facts narrated i