Criminal proceedings initiated from civil disputes constitute an abuse of process, and courts must prevent misuse of criminal law for personal vendettas.

JUDGMENT :

(Prashant Kumar, J.)

Heard Shri Vaibhav Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Shashi Dhar P andey, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the records.

2. The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing of the charge-sheet No. 06 of 2015 including entire proceeding emanating therefrom being Case No. 1789 of 2015 (State v. Vivek D Wakechaure) (Case Crime No. 44/2014) under Section 418, 420, 427, 465, 467, 471, 472, 474 IPC, P.S.-Chiragon, District-Jhansi pending before A.C.J.M.-Ist, Jhansi.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is a 'Senior Mobile Lab Officer' in Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. and he was assigned the job of checking the dispensing units of distributors (petrol pump herein) as well as quality check of petroleum products being sold from the petrol pumps pertaining to Agra Region. On 12.9.2009, the applicant alongwith his team, inspected a petrol pump in District-Jhansi (Agra Region) i.e. M/s Bhagwan & Company, and it was found that the dispensing unit of the first informant's petrol pump are malfunctioning from the nozzle and quality of the diesel was also found malfunctioning. The same was sent to the lab for further investigation. A random inspection report dated 12.9.2009 was prepared by the applicant mentioning therein ''HSD DU Short delivering 70 ml per strike short''. Thereafter, the sales and supplies of the petrol pump of the first informant was suspended. The recovered articles were sent to the respective labs immediately and as per report of the Quality Control Lab of the Corporation at Mathura, vide dated 17.9.2009 (as per marketing discipline guidelines), it was found that the sample does not meet the specification as per IS-1460-2005 (latest version) in Sulphur content and it was found that the FBP is 360o C and the total recovery is 96%.

4. Thereafter, show-cause notice was issued to the first informant, and after giving full opportunity of hearing to him, the dealership agreement was terminated by the Senior Regional Manager, Hindustan Petroleum Corporation vide order dated 8.12.2010.

5. Though, in the dealership agreement dated 19.12.1982, it was clearly mentioned that in case of any dispute, the matter would be referred back to the sole arbitrator under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for adjudication and this arbitration clause was also mentioned in the termination letter. The informant instead of availing the arbitration, after three years of passing of termination order, made an appeal on 2.4.2013 before the Executive Director-Retail and Appellate Authority, Hindustan Petroleum Corporation. During pendency of the aforesaid appeal, the first informant filed an application under Section 156(3) CrPC dated 13.8.2013 before the Judicial Magistrate, Jhansi, in which, it was alleged that the dealership was allotted to the opposite party No. 2 in the year 1982 in the category of SC/ST. Since then, the officials of the corporation had been harassing him to get any partnership with a general category person. Due to this harassment, they came to the petrol pump of the applicant and as a part of the harassment, the applicant had investigated the petrol pump and initiated proceedings against him. The counsel for the applicant further submits that the applicant had carried out his duty in the official capacity and no FIR could have been lodged against the person for carrying on his official duty. This was treated as a complaint by the Court below vide order dated 6.9.2013. After that, the statement of first informant was recorded under Section 200 CrPC. Though the Court has treated as a complaint, still the opposite party No. 2 chose to file an application under Section 482 CrPC in this Court being Application under Section 482 No. 34147 of 2013 (Bhagwan Das v. State of U.P. and others), in which, it is held as under :

''I deem it proper to observe that the applicant shall have the right to move before the