The court ruled that where allegations do not substantiate criminal offenses, particularly under Sections 406, 420, and 506 IPC, the FIR is quashed to prevent abuse of legal process.

JUDGMENT :

ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.

Heard the parties.

2. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of CriminalProcedure, 1973 with the prayer to quash the entire criminal proceeding including the First Information Report (F.I.R.) registered as Sukhdeo Nagar (Pandra O.P.) P.S. Case No.459 of 2020 for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 120B, 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioner No.1 being the Chairman, petitioner No.2 being the then Chief Executive Officer and the petitioner No.3 being the present Chief Executive Officer of Mithila Grih Nirman Swablambi Sahkari Samiti Ltd. registered under the Bihar and Orissa Co-operative Societies Act, VI of 1935, sold two pieces of land to the informant on behalf of the said society; one measuring five (5) decimals and the other measuring 3.5 decimals. The undisputed fact remains that consequent upon the sale of the land, correction slip in respect of the land, has also been made in the revenue records, the copy of which has been kept at page-48 of the brief which is also the part of the F.I.R. It is the claim of the informant that the petitioners have sold a land other than the land in respect of which sale-deed has been executed but it is the admitted case of the informant that both the lands are adjacent to each other. On the basis of the written-report submitted by the informant, police registered Sukhdeo Nagar (Pandra O.P.) P.S. Case No.459 of 2020 and took up the investigation of the case.

4. 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.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners relies upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case ofMitesh Kumar J. Sha vs. State of Karnataka & Others reported in(2022) 14 SCC 572 wherein in paragraph-44, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has reiterated that at innumerable instances, where the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has expressed its disapproval for imparting criminal colour to a civil dispute, made merely to take advantage of a relatively quick relief granted in a criminal case in contrast to a civil dispute and such an exercise is nothing but an abuse of the process of law which must be discouraged in its entirety.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioners next submits that the only allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners have sold a piece of land adjacent to another land which they were supposed to sale. There is no material in the record to show that the land sold is at any disadvantage than the land which was supposed to be sold. It is further submitted that it may be at best a civil dispute but no way the offence punishable under any of the penal provisions of law, is made out.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioners next relies upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case ofInder Chand Bagri vs. Jagadish Prasad Bagri & Another reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC 2529 wherein in the facts of that case where the complainant omitted to aver as to how the property entrusted to the accused, was dishonestly misappropriated or converted for his own use, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India held that no offence punishable under Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code is made out and submits that in this case also, there is no allegation against any of the petitioners of dishonest misappropriation of any entrusted property and in the absence of the same, the