Abuse of process of law and the purely civil nature of a case can lead to the quashing of criminal proceedings.

JUDGMENT :

SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, J.

1. Heard Mr. Indrajit Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Ashok Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for respondent no. 2 and Mr. Mrinal Kanti Roy and Mr. Ravi Kerketta, learned counsel for the State.

2. In these petitions, common complaint case and common order taking cognizance are challenged and that is why all these petitions have been heard together with consent of the parties.

3. These petitions have been filed for quashing the entire criminal proceeding including the order dated 11.07.2016 passed by the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur in Complaint Case No. 850/2016, pending in that court.

4. The complaint case has been filed alleging therein that the complainant is a non-resident Indian, a Doctor by profession who booked a commercial unit from the accused who is a Limited Company, engaged in developing, constructing and building residential and commercial properties, in one of its project known as Capital Tower-1, Complex located at Sector 26, Gurgaon, Haryana. At the time of launch of the aforesaid project, a wide promotional campaign was undertaken by the accused by advertisements and sales promotion employees. It has been further alleged that great promises were extended to the prospective buyers by assuring high returns on investment. In such endeavor, two representatives of Ashish Jerath met the complainant and convinced him to invest in the above project by promising high returns on the investment. On persistent approached by the accused persons viz. 10 to 13, in the residence of complainant and the complainant was allured in investing his hard earned money in the project and booked a commercial unit bearing no. CT-1-GF-02, measuring 1996 sq. ft. in Capital Tower-1, Sector 26, MG Road, Gurgaon, for a total consideration of Rs. 6,54,54,506/- in joint names of self and his wife. As per requirement contained in the application form which the complainant was required to fill he was to pay Rs. 25,00,000/- as booking amount. As per payment schedule annexed with the application form, an applicant was required to pay a total amount of Rs. 65,19,521.43/- towards 50% of IDC, 10% of basic and 50% EDC towards booking. The complainant made the aforesaid payment by way of two installments i.e. a sum of Rs. 25,00,000/- vide cheque bearing no. 577282 dated 29.07.2013 and further sum of Rs. 40,19,521/- vide cheque bearing no. 675033 dated 05.10.2013. The complainant was to make further payments by way of financing a Bank would approve and release the loan installments on apprised of this position. None of this amount was towards earnest money. The application form was a printed form which contained conditions of application favourable to the accused and were totally arbitrary and constituted unfair trade practices. The complainant would neither add or delete any of the conditions mentioned in the form. The application form in conditions (viii) and (ix) described that the said application did not constitute any offer to definite allotment or any agreement to sell and the applicant would not become entitled to the provisional and/or final allotment of the unit, notwithstanding the fact that the company might have issued a receipt in acknowledgment of the money tendered with the said application. It was read that the application shall become definitive only after the execution of the agreement by an unauthorized signatory of the company. No agreement was executed by the parties and, thus, the said application had never become definitive. In case of non-execution of the agreement, the allotment was to be cancelled at the instance of approached to sign the agreement. It has been also alleged that the terms of the agreement cannot be forced by one party upon the second party. Both parties had equal rights to back out from entering into agreement, if the terms of the same were prejudicial to one's interest. The application forms further contained conditions which were beneficial t