IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND RAMESH PHADKE

th

ON THE 7 OF OCTOBER, 2025 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 10363 of 2019 PRAFULL SHARMA AND OTHERS Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS Appearance:

Shri Sameer Kumar Shrivastava - Advocate for the petitioner.

Shri A P S Tomar Ga appearing on behalf of Advocate General. Shri Aman Raghuwanshi On Behalf Of appeared for respondent.

ORDER This petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioners for quashing of the FIR dated 5.2.2019 registered at Crime No.52/2019 at Police Station Jhansi Road, Gwalior for offence punishable under Sections 420, 341, 506, 34 of IPC.

2. The prosecution case as set forth in the FIR is that on 05.02.2019, the complainant, Shri Kamlesh Chaurasiya, lodged a written report alleging that he is engaged in business under the name and style of Yash Construction and Consultancy. During the course of his business dealings, he came into acquaintance with the present petitioner, Shri Prafull Sharma, who developed close personal and family relations with the complainant, thereby gaining his trust and confidence. The petitioner demanded a sum of Rs. 17,00,000/- from the complainant for his personal use. Acting upon the said request and in good faith, the complainant allegedly paid an amount of Rs. 17,00,000/- in cash to the petitioner on 18.07.2016, for which a written agreement was executed stipulating that the said amount would be repaid by 30.07.2016. The petitioner issued two cheques amounting in total to Rs. 17,00,000/- towards repayment. However, upon presentation, both cheques were dishonoured due to insufficiency of funds in the petitioner’s account. Subsequently, it is alleged that on 12.11.2017, the petitioner visited the residence of the complainant and requested the return of the previously issued cheques, assuring that he would issue another cheque in their place. Believing the petitioner’s assurance, the complainant returned the old cheques, whereafter the petitioner allegedly brandished a pistol and fled from the spot. A report regarding this incident was lodged on 13.11.2017. Further, the complaint records that on 05.02.2019, the complainant allegedly saw the petitioner riding an Activa scooter bearing registration no. MP07-SF-7779. The petitioner stopped the complainant, confronted him regarding the report filed against him, and that another individual named Sangam Tyagi, who was with the petitioner at that time, also threatened the complainant. On the basis of these allegations, the instant FIR came to be registered against the present petitioners.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the allegations levelled against the present petitioner are false, fabricated, and motivated, and that the registration of the FIR in question amounts to an abuse of the process of law. The alleged transaction pertains to a purely civil dispute arising out of a financial arrangement between the parties. The alleged dishonour of cheques, if true, falls squarely within the purview of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, for which appropriate remedy lies before the competent court. The attempt to give a criminal colour to a civil dispute is wholly impermissible in law. It is further argued that the FIR was lodged after an unexplained and inordinate delay, which clearly indicates malafide intent on the part of the complainant to harass the petitioners. The incident allegedly involving the pistol and subsequent confrontation is highly improbable and concocted, intended only to bolster a false narrative. Learned counsel further argues that the petitioner is a law-abiding citizen and has been falsely implicated in the present matter with an ulterior motive to exert undue pressure and extract money. It has further been argued that the present case is a clear example of misuse of the process of law by the complainant in connivance with certain police officials. The entire case has been delibe