A criminal proceeding for cheating cannot be maintained when the dispute is essentially of a civil nature, arising from a breach of contract. Criminal law should not be used as a tool for harassment or as a mechanism to force settlements in purely commercial or property-related disputes.

Order on Board

Per Ramesh Sinha, C.J.

1. By way of this petition under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the petitioners are praying for the following reliefs:

“It, is therefore, prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the instant petition and Consequently quash the F.I.R. no. 05/2025 registered with the Police Station Purani Basti, District Raipur (C.G.) by the Respondent No. 1 on 04.01.2025 for offence punishable under section 420, 467, 468 read with section 34 of Indian penal Code, further quash Chargesheet bearing no. 126/2025 dated 12.05.2025 (ANNEXURE P-1) for offence punishable under section 420, 467, 468 read with section 34 of Indian penal Code and also quash the order taking cognizance dated 16.06.2025 registering criminal case bearing Criminal Case No. 27590/2025, as well the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 27590/2025 pending before the Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Raipur (C.G.) against the petitioners pursuant to the aforesaid chargesheet, in the interest of justice.

And/or any other relief/ relief’s which this Hon’ble Court may think fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may please be also granted to the petitioner in the interest of justice.”

2. Brief facts of the case emerges from the pleadings of the petition are that, the respondents No. 2 and 3/complainants have made a written complaint to the police on 14.05.2024 with the allegation that the petitioners have owned certain lands of 1.512 hectare of various khasra numbers at Village Bhatagaon, P.H. No. 105/60, Tahsil and District Raipur. They entered into an agreement on 13.02.2023 for total consideration of Rs. 23 lakhs through Ashish Bajpai to sell the land of Rekha Goyal, admeasuring 0.493 hectare of two khasra numbers. Ashish Bajpai shown himself to be the agreement holder with Rekha Goyal and also entered into agreement with respect to the land of Smt. Jaya Bajpai, admeasuring 0.895 hectare and executed an agreement to sale in their favour on 13.02.2023. The proposed purchasers were put in possession of the subject land after payment of Rs. 1.30 crores. They started development of the plots and constructed inner road in the land and invested Rs. 45 lakhs. On 19.12.2023, the owner of the land published a general notice in the daily newspaper that they are going to sale the subject land to the other persons. The rebuttal has been published in daily newspaper by them on 22.12.2023 and 29.12.2023. Ashish Bajpai, though he is not the owner of the land and has not been authorized by Rekha Goyal, entered into an agreement to sale the land admeasuring 0.493 hectare belongs to Rekha Goyal and after executing the agreement on 13.02.2023, obtained Rs. 82 lakhs. His daughters Ku. Saumya Bajpai received Rs. 15 lakhs, Ku. Tanya Bajpai Rs. 10 lakhs and his wife Smt. Jaya Bajpai received Rs. 23 lakhs in the said agreement and thus they have taken Rs. 1.30 crores. The complainants have also invested Rs. 45 lakhs in development of plots, yet they published the general notice in daily newspaper and then the complainants came to know that the accused persons are going to sell the land to one Rajesh Ahuja. The agreement executed between them and the accused persons are still in force and they are ready to execute the sale-deed in their favour. It is also alleged that, one part of the land was recorded in the name of Surendra Goyal, who is the husband of Rekha Goyal and his land was also shown by Ashish Bajpai