A breach of contract constitutes a civil wrong unless evidence establishes a dishonest intention at the inception of the agreement. When the dispute is essentially civil and no initial fraud exists, continuation of criminal proceedings constitutes an abuse of the judicial process.

ORDER :

ANIL KUMAR UPMAN, J.

1. Instant Criminal Misc. Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner with the prayer to quash the entire criminal proceedings emanating from FIR No.139/2016, registered at Police Station Nagauri Gate, District Jodhpur (East) for offences punishable under Sections 420, 406 and 120B of the IPC along with charge-sheet dated 09.07.2018 and further proceedings pending before the Court of learned Metropolitan Magistrate No.10, Jodhpur in Criminal Case No.1417/2018.

2. The brief facts of the case are that a complaint was filed by the complainant–respondent No.2 under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. against the petitioner and the co-accused, Sunil Baweja, pursuant to which FIR No.139/2016 came to be registered at Police Station Nagauri Gate, District Jodhpur (East). Upon completion of investigation, the police filed a charge-sheet against the petitioner and the co-accused before the competent Court for offences punishable under Sections 420, 406 and 120B of IPC. Since the petitioner did not join the investigation, the charge- sheet qua him was filed under Section 299 Cr.P.C. After filing of the charge-sheet, the learned trial Court took cognizance and framed charges against the co-accused, Sunil Baweja. However, the proceedings against the present petitioner were kept pending as he was declared an absconder.

3. Counsel for the petitioner submits that essentially, there is a civil dispute between the parties arising out of monetary transactions which has been given a criminal colour. It is submitted that in the year 2018, the parties had entered into a compromise, pursuant to which the petitioner as well as the co- accused, Sunil Baweja, have already paid the entire disputed amount to the complainant. Counsel submits that while granting bail to the co-accused, this Court had taken note of the payment of Rs.50,000/- made to the complainant and had observed that the balance amount would be paid upon his release. It is contended that the said amount has since been fully paid and the compromise stands duly acted upon. In such circumstances, the continuation of the criminal proceedings in pursuance of the FIR is fruitless and would be a futile exercise and a waste of precious judicial time and resources. It is further submitted that even if the allegations in the FIR are taken at their face value, no criminal offence is made out against the petitioner or the co-accused. The dispute emanates from an agreement for local distributorship executed between the parties on certain terms and conditions. The alleged non-supply of goods, owing to subsequent disputes, at best gives rise to a civil liability and does not attract criminal culpability. Counsel thus, prays that the entire criminal proceedings arising out of the impugned FIR be quashed.

4. Learned State Counsel places on record factual report dated 06.04.2026 received from SHO, Police Station Nagauri Gate, District Jodhpur (East). According to the factual report, on 10.05.2024, the Investigating Officer visited the residence of the petitioner, where he met the petitioner’s father, Indra Shekhari. During the visit, Indra Shekhari produced an affidavit dated 13.07.2018, executed by the husband of the complainant, acknowledging the receipt of a sum of Rs.2,96,000/- through a demand draft. The Investigating Officer collected the certified copy of the affidavit along with a copy of the demand draft, and same were taken on record. The factual report further indicates that the petitioner does not hav