1 20-J-APL-779-2023-CORRECTED.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO.779 OF 2023 APPLICANT : Rathin s/o Rameshchandra Mukherjee, Aged 55 Yrs., Occ. Business in the name & style ‘Empire Ispat’, R/o Flat No.318, Rachana Madhuban Apartment, Mankapur, Koradi Road, Nagpur – 440030. Aadhar Card No.4743 6956 0967 Mobile No.98900735872. V E R S U S NON-APPLICANTS : 1. State of Maharashtra Through The Secretary, Home Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32. 2. The Police Station Officer, Desaiganj (Wadsa) Police Station, Desaiganj (Wadsa), Tah. Wadsa, Dist. Gadchiroli. 3. Nanak s/o Gombumal Kukreja, Aged 55 Yrs, Occ. Business in the name & style ‘Kukreja Traders’, Desaiganj (Wadsa), R/o Kannamwar Ward, Desaiganj (Wadsa), Tah. Desaiganj, Dist. Gadchiroli, Mobile No.9422906586. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri Sarang Malode, Advocate for applicant. Shri A. M. Joshi, Additional Public Prosecutor for non-applicant Nos.1 and 2. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM: URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J. DATED : 20/02/2026. ORAL JUDGMENT : 2026:BHC-NAG:4974-DB 2 20-J-APL-779-2023-CORRECTED.doc 1. Heard. Admit. Heard finally with the consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties. 2. Despite service of notice, none appears for the non- applicant No.3. 3. The above crime is registered on the basis of report lodged by the complainant on an allegation that he is doing the business of sale of steel and cement at Desaiganj that the applicant is also doing the business of supply of steel and the complainant was in acquaintance with the applicant. On 27/03/2021, the complainant asked the applicant that he wants to purchase 20 tonnes steel from the applicant. Thereupon, the applicant agreed to sell and supply the said steel for total amount of Rs.10,00,000/-. Out of which, the complainant has paid Rs.5,00,000/- by RTGS on 27/03/2021 and further agreed that remaining amount will be paid after receipt of same, but neither the stock was delivered nor the amount was returned back to him and thereby, the present applicant has committed an offence. 4. Heard learned counsel for the applicant who submitted that in view of the documents which are seized during the investigation by the Investigating Officer which is the communication to the Additional Commissioner of Sales Tax dated 3 20-J-APL-779-2023-CORRECTED.doc 29/08/2025 which shows that the GST registration of the present applicant is already cancelled. It further states that when he has searched on the E-Way Bill Portal, it reveals to him that goods are already delivered to the complainant as well as the invoice was also delivered and the Toll Plaza details also show that the vehicle was passed to deliver the same. Thus, he submitted that in view of E-Way Bill which is collected during the investigation sufficiently shows that this is a false case registered against the present applicant and therefore, application deserves to be allowed. 5. Per contra, learned APP for the State strongly opposed the said contention and invited my attention towards the statement of the driver who discloses that he never delivered the said goods at the godown of the complainant and therefore, application deserves to be rejected. 6. On hearing both the sides and on perusal of the entire investigation papers, the only allegation against the present applicant is that though he accepted the amount to deliver the steel of 20 tonnes but not delivered the same and some of the consideration amount is already paid. The communication from the Goods and Services Tax Department, Government of Maharashtra to the Additional Commissioner of Goods and 4 20-J-APL-779-2023-CORRECTED.doc Services Tax Department shows that E-Way Bill is already issued to the complainant and from the said E-Way Bill, it reveals that vehicle was passed on that day bearing Vehicle No.CG 07 C 3413 and goods are already delivered to the complainant as well as invoice amount of Rs.10,70,584/- as well as Rs.5,31,264/- is already issued to the present complainant. Thus, in view of the said document which is collected during the investigation sufficiently shows that no prima facie case is made out against the present applicant. Due to the business transaction, this FIR came to be lodged against the present applicant. In view of that, application deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, I proceed to pass following order :- ORDER i] The application is allowed. ii] The FIR in connection with Crime No.25/2023 registered under Section 420 of the IPC and the consequent proceeding arising out of the same bearing RCC No.114/2025 pending before the CJJD & JMFC, Desaiganj is hereby quashed and set aside to the extent of present applicant. 7. The application is disposed of. [JUDGE] Choulwar Corrected as per Court’s order dated 16/03/2026.