1. Heard the parties.

2. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure with the prayer to quash and set aside the entire criminal proceeding as well as FIR of Govindpur P.S. Case No.67 of 2018 corresponding to G.R. Case No.1070 of 2018 arising out of Complaint Case No.2987 of 2015 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420/406 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the investigation of the case is still going on and charge sheet has not yet been submitted in this case.

4. The allegations against the petitioner is that the petitioner claiming himself to be the Chairman-cum-Managing Director of M/s Vasavi Industries Ltd. approached the complainant for the purchase of coke on credit basis and made part payment of the coke supplied by paying small fractional amounts and an amount of Rs.1,04,36,479/- was due and payable against the petitioner and the co-accused persons which they were supposed to pay between July, 2014 to September, 2014 and though the co-accused persons issued five cheques in discharge of the said debt, but all the cheques were dishonored. A separate complaint case has been instituted in respect of the dishonor of cheques. There is further allegation that the accused persons of the case visited the office of the complainant and demanded further quantity of coke for their company as well as another company namely Mynah Industries Limited on false payment assurance and the complainant further on 23.11.2014 supplied coke to Mynah Industries Limited as well as M/s Vasavi Industries Ltd. and a sum of Rs.1,02,20,665/- became due against the petitioners and Rs.6,50,254/- become due and payable by the Mynah Industries Limited, but the accused persons of the case did not pay the said amount.

5. The complainant filed Complaint Case No.2987 of 2015 in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad which upon being referred to police under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C.; police registered Govindpur P.S. Case No.67 of 2018 and took up investigation of the case which is going on at present.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of S.W. Palanitkar & Others vs. State of Bihar & Another reported in (2002) 1 SCC 241 and submits that therein the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in para-21 held that a mere failure to keep up promise subsequently cannot be presumed as an act leading to cheating.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner next relies upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of G.V. Rao vs. L.H.V. Prasad & Others reported in (2000) 3 SCC 693 and submits that therein the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India held that Section 415 has two parts; while in the first part, the person must “dishonestly” or “fraudulently” induce the complainant to deliver any property; in the second part, the person should intentionally induce the complainant to do or omit to do a thing.

8. Learned counsel for the petitioner next submits that in this case, the alleged transaction took place in connection with a commercial transaction between the parties and undisputedly the amount due has already been paid by way of cheques, but it is the case of the complainant that the cheques have been dishonored, but admittedly the cheques were not issued by the complainant and the complainant/opposite party no.2 claims that he has instituted separate complaint case in respect of dishonour of cheques, so in view of the admitted fact, no offence punishable under Section 406 or 420 of the Indian Penal Code is made out.

9. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that this is a case which is purely of civil in nature, but a cloak of criminal case has been given to the civil dispute for the purpose of wreaking vengeance against the petitioner, hence, the prayer as prayed for by the petitioner in this Cr.M.P., be allowed.

10. Learned Spl.P.P. appearing for the State and the learned counsel for the opposite party No.2 on the other hand vehemently oppose the prayer of the petitioner made in the instant Cr.M.P and submit that the allegation made in the FIR is sufficient to constitute both the offences punishable under Section 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code. Therefore, it is submitted that this Cr.M.P., being without any merit, be dismissed.

11. Having heard the rival submissions made at the Bar and after carefully going through the materials available in the record, it is pertinent to mention here that it is a settled principle of law as has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Vir Prakash Sharma Vs. Anil Kumar Agarwal & Anr., reported in (2007) 7 SCC 373 wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has observed that when the dispute between the parties is essentially a civil dispute, nonpayment or under-payment of the price of the goods by itself does not amount to commission of an offence of cheating or criminal breach of trust.

12. Now coming to the facts of the case, the undisputed facts remains that the petitioner in capacity of Chairman-cum-Managing Director of a company approached the complainant for supply of coke. Admittedly, some part payment of the coke supplied has been received by the complainant and for the rest of the amount, the authorized signatories of the company concerned have issued five cheques which were dishonoured and for which separate complaint case has been instituted by the complainant/opposite party no.2.

13. Under such circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that at best, it is a case of under payment of the goods supplied and the same by itself is not sufficient to constitute the offence punishable under Section 406 or 420 of the Indian Penal Code ; the same having been taken place in respect of the commercial transaction and the price of goods has already been paid by the concerned persons by way of cheques, more so, even after the dishonour of cheques, some more coke has been supplied by the complainant. Basically, this is a case of civil dispute being given a cloak of a criminal case for the purpose of wreaking vengeance. Hence, this Court is of the considered view that the continuation of this criminal proceeding against the petitioner will amount to abuse of process of law and this is a fit case where the entire criminal proceeding as well as FIR of Govindpur P.S. Case No.67 of 2018 corresponding to G.R. Case No.1070 of 2018 arising out of Complaint Case No.2987 of 2015 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420/406 of the Indian Penal Code, be quashed and set aside.

14. Accordingly, the entire criminal proceeding as well as FIR of Govindpur P.S. Case No.67 of 2018 corresponding to G.R. Case No.1070 of 2018 arising out of Complaint Case No.2987 of 2015 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420/406 of the Indian Penal Code, is quashed and set aside qua the petitioner only.

15. In the result, this Cr.M.P., stands allowed.

16. In view of disposal of this Cr.M.P., the I.A. No.1529 of 2026 is disposed of being infructuous.