Advocates:
['SUNIL SAHU', '', 'SUMIT SHRIVASTAVA', 'A G', '', 'SAMIR SINGH RES']

Page 1 of 4

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

CRMP No. 408 of 2019

1.

Roshan Lal Burman, S/o Late Shri Parasram Burman, Aged

About 50 Years, R/o Village- Chhirhuti, P.S. & Tahsil Lormi,

Civil & Revenue District- Mungeli (C.G.)

2.

Mangla Navrang, S/o Shri Kaliram Navrang, Aged About 61

Years, R/o Village Chhirhuti, P.S. & Tahsil Lormi, Civil &

Revenue District- Mungeli (C.G.)

3.

Smt. Kalawati Burman, W/o Shri Roshan Lal Burman, Aged

About 37 Years, R/o Village Chhirhuti, P. S. & Tahsil Lormi,

Civil & Revenue District- Mungeli (C.G.)

---- Petitioners

Versus

1.

State of Chhattisgarh, through the District Magistrate, Bilaspur,

District- Bilaspur (C.G.)

2.

Durjan Singh, Uikey, S/o Shri Mansaha Siingh, Aged About 62

Years, R/o Village Shivtarai, P.S.- Kota, Civil & Revenue

District- Bilaspur (C.G.)

---- Respondents

______________________________________________________

For Petitioner

:

Mr. Sunil Sahu, Advocate.

For State/Res. No. 1

:

Mr. Hari Om Rai, Panel Lawyer.

For Respondent No. 2

:

Mr. Samir Singh, Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas

Order On Board

03/08/2021

1.

The petitioners have filed the present petition under Section

482 of the Cr.P.C. for quashment of entire proceeding in

Criminal Case No. 162/2016 pending before Judicial

Magistrate First Class, Kota, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) arising

out of Crime No. 306/2015 registered at Police Station- Kota,

District- Bilaspur (C.G.) against the petitioners for committing

offence punishable under Sections 380, 420, 467, 468, 384,

34 of I.P.C. and Sections 3 & 4 of the Chhattisgsarh Protection

of Debtors Act, 1937 (for short “the Act, 1937”) on account of

amicable settlement arrived at between the parties.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the

complainant/ respondent No. 2- Durjan Singh Uikey lodged a

report at Police Station- Kota on 12.09.2015 against the

Page 2 of 4

petitioners alleging that he has taken loan from Punjab

National Bank, Kargi Road, Kota Branch and Petitioner No. 1-

Roshanlal Burman has committed theft of cheque from his

loan account, got issued the ATM Card and withdrawn sum of

Rs. 5,08,200/- from his account with help of the other co-

accused persons. After completion of investigation, charge-

sheet has been filed before Judicial Magistrate First Class,

Kota, District- Bilaspur and Criminal Case No. 162/2016 has

been registered against the petitioners.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioners would further submit that

during pendency of Criminal Case No. 162/2016, the entire

amount Rs. 5,08,200/- has been returned back by the

petitioners to respondent No. 2- Durjan Singh. Thereafter,

they have filed an application under Section 320 (2) of the

Cr.P.C. for compounding the offences, which was allowed in

part. The learned trial court has compounded the offence

under Section 420 of I.P.C. & Sections 3 & 4 of the Act, 1937

and the offence alleged to have been committed by the

petitioners under Sections 380, 467, 468, 384, 34 of I.P.C.

have not been compounded.

4.

Learned counsel for respondent No. 2 does not oppose the

submission made by learned counsel for the petitioners.

5.

Hon'ble the Supreme Court in case of State of Madhya

Pradesh Vs. Laxmi Narayan & others¹, has summarized the

law for quashing of FIR, the relevant paragraphs are extracted

below:-

“15.1That the power conferred under Section

482 of the Code to quash the criminal

proceedings for the non-compoundable offences

under Section 320 of the Code can be exercised

having overwhelmingly and predominantly the

civil character, particularly those arising out of

commercial transactions or arising out of

matrimonial relationship or family disputes and

when the parties have resolved the entire dispute

amongst themselves;

15.5 While exercising the power under Section

482 of the Code to quash the criminal

1

(2019) 5 SCC 688

Page 3 of 4

proceed