Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, learned

High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 -

State and learned counsel for respondent No.2/de-facto

complainant.

The petitioners have filed this petition under

Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying to quash the FIR in Crime

- 3 -

No.134/2022 of Station Bazar police station, Kalaburagi,

pending on the file of learned Principal JMFC, Kalaburagi,

registered for the offence punishable under Section 420 of

IPC.

3.

For the sake of convenience, the parties are

referred to as per their ranking before the Trial Court. The

petitioners are accused Nos.1 and 2, respondent No.1 is

the complainant and respondent Nos.2 is the de-facto

complainant.

4.

The brief facts of the prosecution case are that,

respondent No.2 is the resident of Kalaburagi and has

having a stock go-down of Bajaj Auto vehicle at Industrial

Area, New Jewargi Road, Kalaburagi; accused No.1 is an

authorized agent for selling the two wheelers and he is the

proprietor

of

Sri

Kamakshi

Bajaj

Showroom

at

Tippasandra, Kolar district. In the month of April, 2020,

accused No.1 approached the complainant and asked to

deliver 44 two wheelers to him with a guarantee that, he

would

pay

Rs.22,79,511.09/-

within

a

short

time.

- 4 -

Believing the words of accused No.1, the complainant

delivered the vehicles, but, accused No.1 has failed to pay

the amount as agreed by him on or before 01.04.2020,

hence, the complainant made several requests to pay the

amount, but, accused No.2 made false assurance to give

the said amount. Hence, the complainant has registered a

case against the accused persons for the offence

punishable under Section 420 of IPC. Taking exception of

the same, the petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 have filed

this petition.

5.

The

learned

counsel

for

the

petitioners

contended that, ingredients of Section 420 of IPC are not

attracted and the alleged transaction is in the nature of

civil transaction. It is contended that, the petitioners have

transferred an amount of Rs.33,90,911/- from their

account to the company account as per the demand made

by the company, but, the complainant is unnecessarily

blackmailing the petitioners by taking disadvantage of the

- 5 -

transaction and he put a demand to pay commission to

him.

6.

On

the

other

hand, learned

counsel

for

respondent No.2 has denied the fact that, the petitioners

have paid the amount to the company.

7.

Perused the material available on record. As

per the FIR and complaint, there is no allegation against

accused No.2/petitioner No.2 so as to attract Section 420

of IPC. The only allegation made against accused No.2 is

that, the complainant has interacted with him over phone

and he assured to pay the amount in a couple of days.

8.

Admittedly, as per the contents of FIR and

complaint,

the

transaction

held

between

accused

No.1/petitioner No.1 and the complainant only. Hence,

further prosecuting accused No.2/petitioner No.2 would

amount to abuse of process of law.

9.

So far as accused No.1/petitioner No.1 is

concerned, there is an allegation that, he is still due to pay

- 6 -

Rs.23,49,134/- and this is a disputed question of fact,

which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under

Section 482 of Cr.P.C. At this stage, there is a prima facie

case made out against accused No.1 and as per the ratio

laid by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of M/S.

NEEHARIKA INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD. v. STATE

OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS reported in AIR 2021

SC 1918, the impugned proceedings as against accused

No.1/petitioner No.1 cannot be quashed under Section 482

of Cr.P.C. Hence, the following:

ORDER

The petition is partly allowed.

The

proceedings

initiated

against

accused

No.2/petitioner No.2 in Crime No.134/2022 of Station

Bazar police station, Kalaburagi district, pending on the file

of learned Principal JMFC, Kalaburagi, for the offence

punishable under Section 420 of IPC is hereby quashed.

- 7 -

Insofar

as

accused

No.1/petitioner

No.1

is

concerned, the petiti