1 apl2040.26.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO.2040 OF 2026 1. Prashant Murlidhar Moorankar Aged about 49 years, Occ: Director Resident of :- 1601, Building No.08, Aspire Tower, Hadapsar, Amnora Park Town, Pune-411028. 2. Ankit Rana S/o Rana Kalyan Singh Aged about 31 years, Occ: Purchase Manager, Resident of :- Ward No:-06, Village – Hirri, Tahsil – Kirnapur, District Balaghat – 481115. (M.P.) 3. Shaashwat S/o R. Mishra Aged about – 31 years, Occ: Plant Head Resident of :- Ward No.10, M.I.G. 39, My Homes Colony, Nowgoan Niguwan, Chhatarpur – 471201 (M.P.) 4. Mayur S/o Prabhakarrao Kaale Aged about - 30 years, Occ: Sales Representative, Resident of Plot No.110, Narmada Colony Near Sai Baba School, Katol Road, Nagpur – 440013. 5. Hrishikesh S/o Digambar Sawant, Aged about 44 years, Occ: Purchase Executive Resident of 302, Yadnesh Apartment, Opposite Sai Baba Mandir, Kailash Nagar, Dombivali West Kalyan, Vishnunagar, Thane – 421202 (M.H.) 6. Aasish Kumar Aged about 46 years, Occ: Business, Residet of 512, Amnora Chambers, Magarpatta Road, Town Centre, Amnora Sadesatra Nali, Pune – 411028. ...APPLICANTS ...V E R S U S… 2026:BHC-NAG:13310 2 apl2040.26.odt 1. The State of Maharashtra, through Police Station Officer, Police Station, Khadan, Akola Dist. Akola. 2. Shri Palash Murlidhar Upadhyay Age 36 years, Occ: Business, Resident of Vijay Housing Society, Gaurakshan Road, Khadan, Akola. ...NON-APPLICANTS ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri B.H. Tekam, Advocate for applicants. Ms H.N. Prabhu, APP for non-applicant no.1/State. Shri N.R. Tekade, Advocate for non-applicant no.2. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM:- M.W. CHANDWANI, J. DATE :- 05.10.2026 ORAL JUDGMENT: 1. Admit. 2. The applicants seek quashing of the First Information Report bearing Crime No.1121/2026 dated 08.06.2026 registered with Police Station, Khadan, District Akola for the offences punishable under Sections 316(2), 318(4) read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 on account of settlement. 3. The FIR indicates that the present case arises out of a commercial transaction concerning the purchase and supply of Urad Dal (Gota). Non-applicant no.2/ complainant is engaged in the business of grain brokerage and trading. It is alleged that on 3 apl2040.26.odt 07.01.2026, the complainant received a purchase order from Samruddhi Organic Farm India Limited, through its representative Mohan Chaudhary, for purchase of Urad Dal (Gota). On the same day, the complainant communicated with Applicant No.5 – Hrishikesh Digambar Sawant, associated with Samruddhi Organic Farm India Limited and informed the complainant that the goods were being loaded in a vehicle from Universal Electricals. Applicant No. 5 further informed the complainant that, after the vehicle was loaded and the receipt and bill of Universal Electricals was received, a purchase order would be issued to the complainant and the account details of Universal Electricals would be provided, after which the complainant is required to make payment. On 08.01.2026, after receiving confirmation from Samruddhi Organic Farm India Limited, the complainant transferred an amount of 28,07,700/- to the account of Universal Electricals. The ₹ complainant states that, after adding his commission, he raised a bill for 29,10,000/- in favour of Samruddhi Organic Farm India ₹ Limited and forwarded the same through WhatsApp on 08.01.2026. According to the complainant, the understanding was that after the goods reached Jaipur, the payment including the complainant's commission would be received by him. After approximately 20 days, when the complainant contacted the 4 apl2040.26.odt concerned employee of Samruddhi Organic Farm India Limited i.e. applicant No.5 regarding payment, he was informed that the goods had not been received and that Universal Electricals would return an amount of 28,07,700/- within eight days. However, the ₹ complainant never received the amount. Therefore, on the basis of the complaint of the complainant the aforesaid offences came to be registered against the applicants. 4. It is contended that the matter has been amicably settled between the applicants and the complainant. The complainant has received the amount which he has paid to the firm of the applicants at the instance of accused no.7. 5. The complainant is present in the Court today and is duly identified by his learned counsel. The complainant has already filed his affidavit on record. It is contended in the affidavit that the matter has been amicably settled between the parties and that he has received the amount from the applicants. It is further contended in the affidavit of the complainant that he does not want to prosecute the applicants and he has no objection if the FIR and the consequent proceedings are quashed. 5 apl2040.26.odt 6. Since, the matter has already been settled between the parties, no purpose will be served in continuing the prosecution. 7. A reference can be made to the decision in the case of Narinder Singh and Others Vs. State of Punjab and Another, [(2014) 6 SCC 466], wherein the Supreme Court has observed as under : “29.2. When the parties have reached the settlement and on that basis petition for quashing the criminal proceedings is filed, the guiding factor in such cases would be to secure : (i) ends of justice, or (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any court. While exercising the power the High Court is to form an opinion on either of the aforesaid two objectives. ….. 29.4. On the other hand, those criminal cases having overwhelmingly and predominatly civil character, particularly those arising out of commercial transactions or arising out of matrimonial relationship or family disputes should be quashed when the parties have resolved their entire disputes among themselves. 29.5. While exercising its powers, the High Court is to examine as to whether the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak and continuation of criminal cases would put the accused to great oppression and prejudice and extreme injustice would be caused to him by not quashing the criminal cases.” 6 apl2040.26.odt 8. In view of the above, a case is made out for exercising the inherent powers of this Court to quash the FIR. Hence, the following order is passed: i. The criminal application is allowed. ii. First Information Report bearing Crime No.1121/2026 dated 08.06.2026 registered with Police Station, Khadan, District Akola for the offences punishable under Sections 316(2), 318(4) read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 are hereby quashed and set aside qua the applicants, subject to the applicants depositing costs of 2 ₹ 5,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) to “Public Welfare Fund” with Union Bank of India, High Court Branch, Nagpur having Account No.129712010001014 and IFSC Code UBIN0812978 within a period of two weeks from the date of this order. iii. The application stands disposed of. (M.W. CHANDWANI J.) Wagh Signed by: Mr. S.R. Wagh Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 06/10/2026 19:13:33