ORDER:

 K. SUJANA, J.

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short ‘Cr.P.C.’) to quash the proceedings against the petitioners in Crime No.545 of 2015 of Banjara Hills Police Station, Hyderabad, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘IPC’).

2. The brief facts of the case are that on 14.05.2015, a complaint was received from Sri Satish Vanthair, Vice President of Mphasis Ltd, stating that Techsmart India Pvt. Ltd, along with its Managing Director Ponduri Venkata Staya Kumar, Additional Director Venkata Janardhana Kutchu, and Director Vidya Ponduri, approached Mphasis Ltd claiming they had been awarded a contract by the Commissioner of Civil Supplies Department, Government of Andhra Pradesh, and Registrar, UIDAI. They persuaded Mphasis Ltd to enter into a teaming agreement on December 10, 2010, to jointly deliver services. Mphasis Ltd invested Rs.14.6 crores and incurred significant costs for software development, implementation, and procurement of kits for UIDAI contract enrollment. However, Techsmart India Pvt. Ltd failed to deliver services, leaving an outstanding balance of Rs.8,07,61,097/-. Despite a settlement agreement, Techsmart India Pvt. Ltd paid only Rs.2,96,00,000/-, leaving a balance of Rs.5,52,00,000/-. The complainant alleged that Techsmart India Pvt. Ltd made false allegations, claiming they had paid the amount to M/s Jayani Software, a company registered and operated by them.

3. Heard Sri M. Abhinay Reddy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners as well as Sri Syed Yasar Momoon, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of respondent No.1-State and Sri M. Pranav, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.2 and 3.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the present complaint filed against the petitioners/accused pertains to a contractual issue that is purely civil in nature and subject to adjudication and that the High Court of Karnataka, by order dated 19.08.2016, appointed Dr. Justice N. Kumar, a former Judge of the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka, as the sole arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute between the parties. He further submitted that even if the allegations in the FIR are taken at face value, they do not disclose any ingredients of the specific offences mentioned therein and that as the FIR does not disclose the commission of any offence, the investigation based on the said FIR is liable to be quashed. He further submitted that the respondents themselves, in their application before the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka concerning the Teaming Agreement dated 10.12.2010, acknowledged that any dispute or difference between the parties was to be resolved amicably through discussions and negotiations, and unresolved disputes were to be referred to arbitration as per the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, with the venue of arbitration being Bangalore.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the complainant, acting with mala fide intentions, is attempting to drag a purely civil matter arising out of a contractual dispute into criminal proceedings to take vengeance against the petitioners, avoid civil liability, and exert undue pressure. The act of the complainant of approaching criminal courts for this purpose renders the FIR liable to be quashed and that there exists an exclusive jurisdictional clause in the agreement, conferring jurisdiction upon the Courts of Karnataka, thereby rendering the present proceedings outside the jurisdiction of P.S. Banjara Hills. He further contended that the respondents did not approach the Court with clean hands, as they failed to disclose material facts concerning payments made by the petitioners to M/s. Mphasis Software & Services (India) Pvt. Ltd., and misled the Court by suppressing these facts, thereby abusing the process of law.

6. In support of the submissions of the learned counsel