1 2025:CGHC:9502-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 713 of 2025 1 - Muthu Nadar Arun Sandron S/o Mutratu, Aged About 63 Years 2 - Arunevel Shanti Devi W/o Muthu Nadar Arun Sandron Aged About 61 Years Both are Residence of NHK Lane, VTC, Salligram, Dist-Chenai, Tamilnadu ... Applicants versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through S.H.O. PS-Kotwali Jagdalpur, District-Bastar (C.G.) 2 - Mohd Israr Kureshi Aged About 46 Years R/o Adawal Rajeev Para, PS-Bodhghat Dist.-Baster (C.G.) ... Respondents For Petitioners : Mr.H.S.Ahluwalia, Advocate For Respondent No.1/State : Mr.Sanghrash Pandey, Government Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge Order On Board Per Ramesh Sinha, C.J. 24.02.2025 BABLU RAJENDRA BHANARKAR Digitally signed by BABLU RAJENDRA BHANARKAR Date: 2025.02.25 17:59:57 +0530 2 1. Heard Mr.H.S.Ahluwalia, learned counsel for the applicants as well as Mr.Sanghrash Pandey, learned Government Advocate appearing for respondent No.1/State. 2. By way of this petition, the petitioners have prayed for following relief:- “Hence prayed that Hon’ble Court be please to quash the F.I.R. bearing crime no.272/2024 dated 22/06/2024 registered against the applicants under Sections 420 & 34 of Indian Penal Code at Police Station-Kotwali, Jagdalpur, Dist-Bastar Chhattisgarh, in exercising the inherent powers under section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in the interest of justice.” 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the contents of the FIR categorically reveals that in a business transaction between the applicant’s firm named as AA Traders for purchasing of Tamarind from the complainant in which the balance amount of Rs.84,91,118/- has not been paid by the applicants. Further the complainant failed to show any documents relating to the agreement entered between the parties to purchase the said article in such fixed rate, therefore, the dispute between the parties is relating to the business transaction which attracts the remedy of civil court but not the criminal court. He further submits that all the transactions between the applicants’ firm and the complainant firm happened through the broker and the applicants are not aware of the complainant directly. As far as the applicants 3 are concerned, there is no pending payment to the complainant. All transactions between them would fall under the category of Sections 2(1)(c)(7) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and there is no prima facie material to prosecute in criminal case. In the present case, looking to the contents of the FIR, on the face of it, the ingredients of Section 405 IPC regarding cheating or the dishonest intention of the petitioners. Since no case of cheating or dishonest intention of inducement is made out and the essential ingredients of Section 420 IPC are missing, the prosecution of the applicants under Section 420 read with Section 34 of the IPC is liable to be quashed. He also submits that the petitioners have been granted anticipatory bail. 4. On the other hand, learned Government Advocate appearing for respondent No.1/State opposes the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners and submits that the FIR discloses the prima facie cognizable offence and as such, no interference is called for. 5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents appended with petition. 6. Considering the facts & circumstances of the case, the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and nature of dispute, we direct the Investigating Officer-respondent No.1 of the present case to conclude the investigation of the present case and submit a police report under Section 173(2) of 4 the CrPC (Now Section 193(3) of the BNNS) before the Magistrate concerned expeditiously, in accordance with law, if already not concluded, preferably within a period of six weeks from today. 7. The petitioners are directed to produce a copy this order to the investigating officer within a period of one week from today 8. With the aforesaid direction, the present petition stands disposed off. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Bablu