SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Headnote Court Copy Facts Arguments Court observation Judicial Analysis Case Map Category Hierarchy Table of Content
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(P&H) 77197

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Mandeep Pannu, J
RAJEEV JHA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER – Respondent
CRM-M-15650-2022



Important Points

Criminal proceedings cannot be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. if the FIR prima facie discloses cognizable offenses, as disputed questions of fact regarding the nature of the dispute (civil vs. criminal) must be decided during trial through evidence appreciation.

Subject

Criminal Law - Quashing of FIR

Act Referred

Headnote

The petitioner sought quashing of an FIR registered under Sections 408, 467, 468, 471, and 204 of the Indian Penal Code, alleging that the dispute was purely civil in nature arising from non-payment of salary and that the criminal proceedings were a counterblast to a civil recovery suit. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner, while employed as an accountant, misappropriated company funds, unauthorizedly encashed cheques into personal accounts, and stole company documents and stamps. The court found that the FIR and investigation records prima facie disclosed the commission of cognizable offenses. The central issue was whether the criminal proceedings could be quashed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on the grounds that the dispute was civil or maliciously initiated. The court reasoned that the inherent powers of the High Court are to be exercised sparingly and cannot be used to conduct a mini-trial or appreciate evidence in detail. Since the allegations involved criminal breach of trust and forgery, and the defense regarding salary dues involved disputed questions of fact, these matters must be adjudicated by the trial court. The present petition, being devoid of merit, is accordingly dismissed.

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Ankur Malik
For the Respondents: Sushil Bhardwaj, Tanmoy Gupta

##PAGE1##

CRM-M-15650-2022 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

CRM-M-15650-2022

Reserved on:-20.05.2026

Pronounced on:-25.05.2026

Uploaded on:- 26.05.2026

Whether only operative part of the judgment is

Pronounced or the full judgment is pronounced: operative part/full judgment

RAJEEV JHA ...Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER ....Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANDEEP PANNU

Present:- Mr. Ankur Malik, Advocate

for the petitioner.

Mr. Sushil Bhardwaj, Addl. A.G. Haryana.

Mr. Tanmoy Gupta, Advocate

for respondent No.2/Complainant.

*****

MANDEEP PANNU, J.

1. Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No.205

dated 27.03.2017 registered under Sections 408, 467, 468 and 471 IPC

(Section 204 IPC added later on vide order dated 07.04.2026) at Police

Station DLF, District Gurugram and all consequential proceedings arising

therefrom.

2. Briefly stated, the allegations in the present FIR are that the

petitioner Rajeev Jha was employed as an Accountant with the complainant-

company namely FOS Laser Spa Pvt. Ltd. And LA Skin since 10.07.2015 on

a fixed salary of Rs.25,000/- per month, which was later enhanced. During

ANU

2026.05.26 09:39

I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this document

Chandigarh

##PAGE2##

CRM-M-15650-2022 2

the course of employment, he was entrusted with accounting work, banking

transactions, cash handling, taxation work and release of cheque payments.

It is alleged that discrepancies were noticed in the accounts maintained by

the petitioner and the company’s CA refused to audit the books on account

of alleged false calculations and incorrect entries. It is further alleged that

the petitioner failed to deposit company cash in the bank account in time

and, upon being questioned, used to furnish false explanations. Thereafter,

the complainant-company issued a one month termination notice to the

petitioner on 22.10.2016. According to the complainant, after receiving the

termination notice, the petitioner stopped reporting for work and switched

off his mobile phone. Subsequently, the complainant received SMS and

email alerts from HDFC Bank regarding clearance of certain cheques from

the company accounts. Upon inquiry, it allegedly came to light that the

cheques had been encashed in accounts linked to the petitioner. It is further

alleged that several cheque leaves, company documents, letterheads and

company stamp were missing and that cash amounting to Rs.37,000/- had

also been misappropriated. On the basis of these allegations, FIR No.205

dated 27.03.2017 under Sections 408, 467, 468 and 471 IPC came to be

registered at Police Station DLF, District Gurugram.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner

was appointed with respondent No.2-firm in June, 2015 on a monthly salary

of Rs.55,000/- and discharged his duties diligently without there being any

complaint against him during the course of employment. It is submitted that

though the agreed salary of the petitioner was Rs.55,000/- per month, the

respondents initially paid only Rs.25,000/- through cheques and the

ANU

2026.05.26 09:39

I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this document

Chandigarh

##PAGE3##

CRM-M-15650-2022 3

remaining amount in cash. Thereafter, from September, 2015 till March,

2016, only Rs.25,000/- through cheques and Rs.5,000/- in cash were

allegedly paid to the petitioner and the balance salary amount remained

unpaid on the assurance that the same would be cleared later. It is further

contended that a sum of Rs.3,44,516/- became due towards arrears of salary

payable to the petitioner. However, instead of clearing the outstanding dues,

the respondents issued a termination notice dated 22.10.2016 and terminated

the services of the petitioner. At the time of termination, the petitioner

handed over charge of all documents and articles belonging to the company

vide inventory dated 20.10.2016. Learned counsel submits that respondent

No.2 had issued four cheques towards salary arrears, out of which only one

cheque bearing No.00349 dated 28.12.2016 amount

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top