2026:CGHC:20401-DB Digitally signed by SAGRIKA SAGRIKA AGRAWAL AGRAWAL D 20 a 2 te 6 : .05.04 NAFR

18:21:25 +0530 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 2047 of 2024 Dipesh Jitendra Thacker S/o Late Jitendra Thacker Aged About 40 Years R/o 503 Shri Laxmi Apartment Shastri Nagar West Thana Bank Mod District Dhanbad, Jharkhand, Pin - 826001 ... Petitioner(s)

versus

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Department Of Home Affairs, Ministry At Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)

2 - The Superintendent Of Police Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.)

3 - Station House Officer P.S. Rajnandgaon Kotwali, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.)

4 - Ajay Ganatra S/o Late Navneet Lal Ganatra R/o Ward No. 30, Behind Patidar Bhawan, S.V. Patel Timber Market, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.)

... Respondent(s)

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rahul Jha, Advocate For State : Mr. S.S. Baghel, Dy. G.A.

For Respondent No. 4 : Mr. Aditya Bhardwaj, Advocate Hon'ble Shr i Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shr i Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge

Order on Board

Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice

01-05-2026

1. Heard Mr. Rahul Jha, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S.S. Baghel, Dy. Govt. Advocate for the Respondent/ State as well as Mr. Aditya Bharadwaj, learned counsel for the Respondent No. 4.

2. The petitioners have filed the present petition under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with the following prayer(s):-

“It is therefore most respectfully prayed that the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the instant petition and be pleased to quash the charge-sheet no.266/2024 filed in Crime No.128/2022 by Police Station Kotwali Rajnandgaon filed as ANNEXURE PA be quashed against the present applicant in the interest of justice.”

3. The present case arises out of a commercial dispute between the complainant (respondent no. 4), acting on behalf of Jalaram IT Solutions, and Wardwiz India Solutions Pvt. Ltd., wherein the complainant was appointed as a super-stockist for the State of Chhattisgarh under an agreement dated 01.09.2017. Pursuant to a scheme floated by the company, the complainant placed an order in May 2019 and made part payments; however, disputes arose regarding alleged excess billing, non-supply and inferior quality of goods, and non-refund of the advance amount, leading to registration of FIR on 22.02.2022 against the directors of the company, including the present applicant. It is the case of the applicant that he had resigned from the directorship on 04.07.2019, prior to the main disputed transactions, and had no role thereafter; further, the material on record reflects that the actual dispute was limited to Rs. 25.80 lakhs, which amount has already been repaid by the company and acknowledged by the complainant. The dispute, essentially arising out of alleged breach of contractual obligations and governed by an arbitration clause, is thus civil in nature, though it has been given a criminal colour, and is presently pending as Criminal Case No. 3017/2024 before the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner had admittedly resigned from the directorship of the company on 04.07.2019, much prior to the alleged cause of action, including the raising of the disputed bill dated 23.10.2019 and the alleged supply of inferior goods, and therefore had no role, control, or involvement in the transactions in question. The FIR, written complaint, and charge-sheet do not attribute any specific allegation, overt act, or incriminating material against the petitioner, and even as per the prosecution record, the complainant had paid only Rs.17.5 lakhs during the petitioner’s tenure, with the remaining dispute arising subsequently. The materials further reflect continuous communication between the parties for amicable settlement, negating any dishonest intention or ingredients of cheating or fraud. It is also an admitted position that th