JUDGMENT

Aman Chaudhary, J.

The present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing of FIR No.336 dated 08.07.2005, registered under Sections 406 , 420, 500 and 506 IPC at Police Station Civil Lines, Karnal and the consequential proceedings arising therefrom.

2. Briefly put, the allegations as made in the complaint is that the air condition was installed by the petitioner in the building of the complainant after causing harassment to him i.e. not settled within the time frame and even the entire work was not completed. The safety control was connected and thereafter, connected with the compressor directly with malafide intention to cause harm to the complainant's building. The warranty card was also not supplied.

3. Initially, respondent No.2 had filed a complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act to which, the petitioner filed written statement, Annexure P-2, whereafter the same was withdrawn by him vide Annexure P-3 after pursuing the same for 2 years, with liberty to file a civil suit. Besides the aforesaid, he also filed a criminal complaint dated 15.06.2005, Annexure P-4 under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Karnal, upon which, FIR No.336 dated 08.08.2005 was registered under Sections 406 , 420, 500, 506 IPC at Police Station Civil Lines, Karnal against the petitioner and the Managing Director of Blue Star limited, with same very allegations as averred in the complaint. The final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. was presented in the Court on 10.10.2006, whereby Mathew Varghese, working as Deputy General Manager of M/s Blue Star Ltd was not challaned, whereas the petitioner being the installer was challaned. Consequently he was wrongly charge-sheeted vide order dated 18.09.2006 by the learned trial Court.

4. Learned counsel has contended that the challan was submitted without any basis. It is apparent that the virtually the entire complaint was reproduced in the final report submitted by the police. No evidence had been collected to substantiate the ingredients of the offences. He submitted that the complainant initially filed a complaint before the Consumer Form with regard to the deficiency in service, which was dismissed as withdrawn and liberty to file a civil suit within a period of two months from the date of withdrawal of the said complaint, however, instead of filing the civil suit, for which he was granted liberty, the complainant filed a criminal complaint. The allegation primarily made against the petitioner pertains to deficiency in service regarding installation of the Air-conditioning plant which is purely a matter of civil nature being an execution of a contract but has been given a criminal colour only to harass and pressurize the petitioner. Thus the proceedings are unjust, unfair and by way of an abuse of the process of law, there are no allegations that right from the beginning of the transaction the petitioner had any dishonest intention of cheating. Still further there is no evidence with regard to any offence under Section 506 IPC. To bolster his submissions, he has placed reliance on the judgment of this Court in case titled as Kuljive Mahajan v. State of Haryana and another, CRM-M- 18224-2014, decided on 18.10.2022.

5. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent No.2 has