Continuance of criminal proceedings based on civil disputes, without established fraudulent intent, is an abuse of process of law.

JUDGMENT :

ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.

1. Heard the parties.

2. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with a prayer to quash the entire criminal proceeding arising out of Giridih Nagar P.S. Case No.37 of 2023 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the investigation of the case is still going on and charge-sheet has not yet been submitted in this case.

4. The allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners entered into an agreement for sale with the informant, took an advance and thereafter also took some more money but subsequently they entered into an agreement with other persons and executed power of attorney in favour of them also.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that even if the entire allegations made against the petitioners are considered to be true in their entirety still none of the offences in respect of which the F.I.R. has been registered, is made out against either of the petitioners. It is further submitted that there is no allegation of any impersonation being committed by the petitioners in execution of the power of attorney in favour of anyone and in the absence of the same, the question of forgery does not arise.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioners relies upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case ofVinod Natesan vs. State of Kerala & Others, (2019) 2 SCC 401 and submits that therein it has been mentioned that as in the facts of that case when the dispute between the parties was a civil dispute and it was tried to be converted into a criminal dispute, therefore, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India was of the view that the continuation of the criminal proceeding against the accused will be an abuse of process of law.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioners next relies upon the judgment of this Court in the case ofReena Lata @ Rina Lata vs. The State of Jharkhand & Another, 2026: JHHC :1072 and submits that therein this Court relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case ofDalip Kaur & Others vs. Jagnar Singh & Another, (2009) 14 SCC 696 , paragraph-10 of which reads as under:-

“10. The High Court, therefore, should have posed a question as to whether any act of inducement on the part of the appellant has been raised by the second respondent and whether the appellant had an intention to cheat him from the very inception. If the dispute between the parties was essentially a civil dispute resulting from a breach of contract on the part of the appellants by non- refunding the amount of advance the same would not constitute an offence of cheating. Similar is the legal position in respect of an offence of criminal breach of trust having regard to its definition contained in Section 405 of the Penal Code. (See Ajay Mitra v. State of M.P. [(2003) 3 SCC 11 : 2003 SCC (Cri) 703] )” (Emphasis supplied)

and submits that therein the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has reiterated the settled principle of law that if the dispute between the parties is essentially a civil dispute resulting from the breach of contract on the part of the accused person by non-refunding the amount of advance, the same would not constitute the offence of cheating.

8. It is next submitted that in that case, this Court also relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case ofUma Shankar Gopalika vs. State of Bihar & Anr. (2005) 10 SCC 336, p