ORDER

This Criminal Petition has been filed by the petitioner/accused seeking to quash the proceedings in Crime No.35 of 2026 of Soan Police Station, Nirmal District, for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4) and 316(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhitha, 2023 (for short ‘BNS’).

2. The brief facts of the case are that the de-facto complainant, on 26.03.2026, lodged a complaint stating that he has been working as an executive at a company named Value Gold for the past three months. On 25.03.2026 at about 14:00 hours, the petitioner visited the Value Gold office claiming to be in possession of 88.85 grams of gold and expressed his intention to sell the same. Believing his representation, the complainant transferred an amount of Rs.9,40,000/- to his Indian Bank account (A/C No.8234149232). However, instead of completing the transaction, the said person fled the premises. It was subsequently found that he, along with his accomplices, transferred the said amount to another bank account. On inquiry, the accomplices were identified as Bhimanna @ Juvala Pawan Kumar and Kovai Neeraj Kumar. Hence, the complaint was lodged seeking necessary legal action against the accused persons.

3. Heard Mr.L.K.Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Jithendar Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has not committed any offences and has been falsely implicated in the present crime. The allegations levelled in the complaint are purely civil in nature, arising out of a monetary transaction. Respondent No.2 filed the present complaint by making omnibus allegations. He further submitted that initially the crime was registered for the offence under Section 318(4) of the BNS. The Investigating Officer, with an intention to avoid following the procedure under Section 35 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”), added the offence under Section 316(5) of the BNS, though the ingredients of the said offence are not attracted against the petitioner. Hence, continuation of proceedings is a clear abuse of the process of law.

5. Per contra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that, by giving a false promise, the petitioner received an amount of Rs.9,40,000/- from respondent No.2, stating that he was in possession of 88.85 grams of gold, and thereafter escaped with dishonest intention. The allegations levelled in the complaint attract the ingredients of the aforesaid offences, and the petitioner is not entitled to seek quashing of the proceedings. He further submitted that the petitioner filed Crl.P.No.4774 of 2026 seeking anticipatory bail, which was dismissed on 16.04.2026. Without disclosing the filing and dismissal of the said anticipatory bail petition, the petitioner has filed the present criminal petition and has not approached this Court with clean hands. Hence, the petitioner is not entitled to equitable relief as envisaged under Section 528 of the BNSS.

6. Having considered the rival submissions made by the respective parties and after perusal of the material available on record, it reveals that on 25.03.2026, the petitioner visited the office i.e., Value Gold of respondent No.2, who is working as an Executive in a company named Value Gold, and claimed to be in possession of 88.85 grams of gold, stating that he wished to sell the same to the company. Believing his words, the complainant transferred an amount of Rs.9,40,000/- to his Indian Bank account bearing No.8234149232. However, though the petitioner was required to transfer the said amount to Muthoot Finance, he failed to do the same and transferred the said amount into different bank account with dishonest intention.

7. The allegations levelled in the complaint, prima facie, disclose cognizable offences. Whether the allegations levelled in the complaint are true or not has to be revealed during the course of investigation,