(2025:JHHC:31533) 1 Cr. M.P. No.2290 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No.2990 of 2024 ------ Rajesh Sukul, S/o Bhartosh Sukul, aged about- 40 years, R/o Nityanandapur, P.O. & P.S.- Nityanandapur, District- Bankura, West Bengal-722177 … Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Tapas Kumar Mahto, S/o Shibu Mahto, R/o Sana Gangpur, P.O. Poddardih, P.S. Nirsa, Dist. Dhanbad, Jharkhand … Opposite Parties ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Sarthak Choudhary, Advocate Mr. Afaque Rashidi, Advocate Md. Azam, Advocate For the State : Mr. Pankaj Kumar, P.P. For the O.P. No.2 : Mr. Shekhar Prasad Sinha, Advocate ------ P R E S E N T HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY By the Court:- Heard the parties. 2. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with a prayer to quash the order dated 15.02.2019 passed in connection with G.R. Case No.488 of 2018 arising out of Nirsa P.S. Case No.35 of 2018 by which the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Dhanbad has taken cognizance of the offences punishable under Sections 420/406 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner took the vehicle of the informant on a monthly rent of Rs.50,000/- per month for a period of 11 months but did not pay a single penny; though the outstanding amount rose up (2025:JHHC:31533) 2 Cr. M.P. No.2290 of 2024 to Rs.4,00,000/- and the petitioner is also not giving any information regarding the said vehicle. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner draws the attention of this Court towards Annexure-2 which is the copy of the order dated 29.03.2019 passed by this Court in A.B.A. No.4724 of 2018 and submits that the petitioner has returned the dumper of the informant and it has been agreed to between the parties that the petitioner will have no liability in connection with the said vehicle and the concerned documents has been signed by the informant also. It is next submitted that the dispute between the parties is at best a civil dispute of breach of contract and no criminal offence is made out against the petitioner. Hence, the continuation of this criminal proceeding against the petitioner will amount to abuse of process of law. Therefore, it is submitted that the prayer of the petitioner, as prayed for in the instant Cr.M.P., be allowed. 5. Learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State and the learned counsel for the opposite party No.2 do not dispute the fact that the petitioner has already handed over the possession of the said dumper taken by him to the informant and the informant has also signed the documents in respect of the same to the effect, that the petitioner has no liability in connection with the said dumper but it is submitted that by such acknowledgment of the informant, the offence which has already been committed by the petitioner, cannot be condoned. Therefore, it is submitted that this Cr.M.P., being without any merit, be dismissed. 6. 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 the dispute between the parties is basically a civil dispute of breach of (2025:JHHC:31533) 3 Cr. M.P. No.2290 of 2024 contract and the informant has given a cloak of criminal case to a pure civil dispute between the parties. The undisputed fact remains that the dumper has already been returned to the informant and the informant has given a clean chit to the petitioner absolving him of all the liabilities in respect of the transaction between them, relating to the said dumper. 7. Under such circumstances, 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, hence, this is fit case where the order dated 15.02.2019 passed in connection with G.R. Case No.488 of 2018 arising out of Nirsa P.S. Case No.35 of 2018 by the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Dhanbad be quashed and set aside. 8. Accordingly, the order dated 15.02.2019 passed in connection with G.R. Case No.488 of 2018 arising out of Nirsa P.S. Case No.35 of 2018 by the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Dhanbad is quashed and set aside against the petitioner named above. 9. In the result, this Cr.M.P. stands allowed. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi Dated the 13th of October, 2025 AFR/ Animesh Uploaded on- 14/10/2025