1 2025:CGHC:8180 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 1943 of 2018 1 - Suresh Nihal S/o Late Jairam Das Nihal Aged About 53 Years R/o New Shanti Nagar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Santosh Pandey S/o Shri R.M. Pandey Aged About 47 Years R/o Near Radha Krishna Mandir, Samta Colony, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Jaipal Singh Gulati S/o Pritam Singh Gulati Aged About 43 Years R/o Old Bus Stand, Korba , Chhattisgarh. 4 - Manoj Uboweja S/o Phuman Lal Uboweja Aged About 56 Years R/o S.B.I. Colony, Tagore Nagar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioners versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Rajendra Nagar, Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Gentel Entertainment Pvt. Limited Above IDBI Bank, B-27, Sector-07, Rajendra Nagar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. Through Its Director Mahesh Gupta, S/o Late Premlal Gupta, R/o Near Sahanai Garden, Gol Chowk, Rohini Puram, Deen Dayal Nagar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondent For Petitioners : Mr. Arvind Shrivastava, Advocate. For Respondent No.1/State : Ms. Supriya Upasane, Govt. Advocate. For Intervener : Ms. Shivali Dubey, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 17.02.2025 1. Heard Mr. Arvind Shrivastava, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Also heard Ms. Supriya Upasane, learned Government RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 Advocate appearing for the respondent No.1/State, as well as Ms. Shivali Dubey, learned counsel for the Intervener. 2. The petitioner has filed the instant petition under Section 482 of CrPC for quashing the FIR bearing No. 33341056180159/2018 dated 06.08.2018 against the petitioners, registered at the Police Station Rajendra Nagar, District – Raipur (C.G.). 3. The prosecution story, in short, is that on behalf of respondent No.2 (complainant) a complaint has been filed alleging that the petitioners/accused persons being Directors/Share Holders of the respondent No.2 Company entered into a conspiracy and has with intention to cheat the other Directors have misappropriated the funds of the respondent No.2 company. The concerned Police Station on the above said written complaint registered the FIR bearing No. 33341056180159/2018 dated 06.08.2018 under the offence punishable under Sections 409, 420 and 120-B of the IPC. The accused persons and other Directors of respondent No.2 Company are having acquaintance for past may years. Thus they had a very cordial relations. Since the petitioners could not satisfactorily explain the accounts to other directors of the respondent No.2 within time it led to some disharmony between them. This all led to filing of the FIR which is the subject matter of the instant petition. The respondent No.1 has erred in registering the FIR without appreciating the nature of the transaction and background of the parties, which can never be said to criminal overact. In the intervening period good sense has prevailed over parties and with the intervention of the other acquaintances negotiations were held for reconciling the dispute and differences amongst the parties. The parties being the resident of the same town and are also having long 3 acquaintances, thus, have resolved their dispute and differences. They have buried the hatches and have settled all their disputes, therefore the complainant had approached the concerned Police Station for withdrawal/compounding of the cases. However since the FIR has already been registered the Police authorities declined to interfere in the matter. This registration of FIR has already caused great hardship to the petitioners. The complainant is not longer interested in pursuing his complaint. Hence, this petition. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the parties are long acquaintances and are resident of the same town and having settled their issues amicably, the continuance of the matter is oppressive to the petitioners and an abuse of process of law. It is further submitted that the parties have amicably settled all their dispute and differences amongst them. It is further submitted that the matter has been compromise between the parties and he has referred to the document annexed on page No. 8 and 9 of the instant petition. Therefore, the FIR registered against the petitioner is liable to be quashed. 5. Learned State counsel submits that though it is stated that the matter has been compromised between the parties and he has referred to the document annexed in page No. 8 and 9 of the petition, but from the perusal of the said application it appears that it is only an application without there being any compromise deed file along with the same, and the matter is at the evidence stage, therefore, the instant petitioner being devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed. 6. Ms. Shivali Dubey, learned counsel for the Intervener submits that her clients are not responding. 4 7. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the materials available on record. 8. Considering the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, and from the perusal of the complaint lodged against the petitioner, it transpires that though it is stated that the matter has been compromised between the parties and he has referred to the document annexed in page No. 8 and 9 of the petition, but from the perusal of the said application it appears that it is only an application without there being any compromise deed file along with the same, and the matter is at the evidence stage, thus I am not inclined to allow the present petition to quash the FIR bearing No. 33341056180159/2018 dated 06.08.2018 lodged against the petitioners, registered at the Police Station Rajendra Nagar, District – Raipur (C.G.). 9. Accordingly, the instant petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is devoid of merits, liable to be and is hereby dismissed, leaving it open to the trial Court to proceed with the trial, if the matter survives. 10. A copy of this order be sent to the concerned trial Court for necessary compliance and follow up action, if any. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rajshekhar