- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26177 CRL.P No. 11513 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 11513 OF 2024 BETWEEN: 1. SRI. SENDHIL G, S/O LATE GOVINDASWAMY, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS. 2. SMT. MEENAKA, WIFE OF SENDHIL.G, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS. 3. SMT. SAROJA, WIFE OF LATE GOVINDASWAMY, AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS. 4. SRI. PRADEEP, SON OF PADMANABHAN, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS. PETITIONERS NO.1 TO 4, R/AT NO.94, 5TH CROSS, SUMATHI NAGAR, ROBERTSONPET, K.G.F-563 122, KOLAR DISTRICT. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. B.V SHANKAR NARAYANA RAO, SENIOR ADVOCATE A/W SUNIL T, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by SANJEEVINI J KARISHETTY Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26177 CRL.P No. 11513 of 2024 AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, REP. BY ROBERTSONPET POLICE, K.G.F.-563 122. REP. BY S.P.P., HIGH COURT BUILDING, BENGALURU-560 001. 2. SMT. PADMAVATHI, WIFE OF LATE DILIP, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 82, 5TH CROSS, SAINT THERASA COLLEGE, CHOOLANAYAKANAHALLI, R.T. NAGAR POST, BANGALORE-560 032. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. WAHEEDA M.M, HCGP FOR R-1; R-2 SERVED & UNREPRESENTED) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNSS) TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS OF C.C.NO.220/2023 FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES OF SECTIONS 384, 420, 342, 323, 504, 506 R/W 34 OF I.P.C. MARKED AS ANNEXURE-D PENDING ON THE FILE OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND PRINCIPAL JMFC AT K.G.F. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26177 CRL.P No. 11513 of 2024 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER The petitioners-accused Nos.1 to 4 are at the doors of this Court calling in question proceedings in C.C.No.220/2023 registered under Sections 384, 420, 342, 323, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. Heard the learned Senior Counsel Sri.B.V.Shankara Narayana Rao appearing for the petitioners and Smt.Waheeda M.M., the learned HCGP representing the respondent-State and have perused the material on record. 3. The complainant though served on 02.02.2025, remains unrepresented even as on date. Therefore, the aforesaid Senior Counsel for the petitioners and the learned HCGP are heard. 4. Facts in brief, germane, are as follows: - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26177 CRL.P No. 11513 of 2024 4.1. The complainant and the petitioners are members of the same family. They allegedly have a transaction between them to the tune of Rs.60,00,000/- which is said to have been transferred from the account of the complainant to the petitioners. The petitioners claim or aver in the petition that the said amount was transferred for the purpose of the clearance of the loan which they have in fact executed the said loan clearance process and the documents to that effect are appended to the petition. Long thereafter, a complaint comes to be registered by respondent No.2 contending that her cheques were stolen and forcibly signatures were taken on certain documents and the amount was transferred from her account to the account of the petitioners. Therefore, there has been cheating, assault and intimidation. Based on the said complaint, the crime comes to be registered in Crime No.39/2022. The police conduct investigation and file a charge sheet. The filing of the charge sheet is what has driven these petitioners to this Court in the subject petition. 5. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners would vehemently contend that the complainant - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26177 CRL.P No. 11513 of 2024 who is a member of the same family has sought to develop an axe to grind against the petitioners for the reason of certain dispute within the family. The learned Senior Counsel further submits that the amount that was received from the hands of the complainant have all been disbursed towards the clearance of the loan that was taken for the purpose of clearance of the medical bills and therefore, submits that the crime registered for the purpose of recovery of money should not be permitted to be continued as a proceeding before the concerned Court. 6. Per contra, the learned HCGP would vehemently refute the submission to contend that the amount is transferred from the hands of the complainant to the petitioners. Though they are members of the same family and there is a transaction between the members of the family, that would not mean that petitioners could escape trial. It is for the petitioners to come out clean in a full-blown trial, is the submission of learned HCGP. 7. As observed hereinabove, the complainant though served on 02.02.2025, remains unrepresented even as on date. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26177 CRL.P No. 11513 of 2024 8. I have given my anxious consideration to submissions made by the respective learned counsel. 9. The afore-narrated facts are a matter of record. The link in the chain of events and the dates are all what are narrated in the petition or the complaint. Since the entire issue has now triggered from the complaint, I deem it appropriate to notice the complaint. The complaint reads as follows. "ರವೆ  ೕ ಸ -ಇೆಕ, ಾಬಸೇೆ  ೕ ಾೆ. ರವಂದ "#ೕಮ% ಪ'ಾ(ವ% )ೋಂ +ೇ , ೕ- ವಯಸು 27 ವಷ, ವ34ಯ ೌಂಡ ಜ8ಾಂಗ, ಗೃ;< )ೆಲಸ, >ಾಸ:-ನಂ-ನಂ.82, 5 8ೇ )ಾ# ಸಂC ತೇEಾ )ಾ+ೇಜು, F.ಐ. +ೇಔ, Iೋಳ8ಾಯಕನಹLM, ಆ.O ನಗರ ಅಂIೆ, QೆಂಗಳRರು-560032 V.ನಂ-9448576326. YಾನZೆ ಈ ಮೂಲಕ ತಮ( \ ದೂರು 3ೕಡುವ]'ೇ8ೆಂದೆ, 8ಾನು ^ೕಲ_ಂಡ `aಾಸದ \ ಗೃ;< )ೆಲಸ Yಾb)ೊಂbದುc, ನಮ( ಅಣeನ ಮ8ೆಯ \ ಇರುfೆgೕ8ೆ. ನನೆ ,8ಾಂಕ 19-02-2018 ರಂದು "#ೕ. , ೕ-.i j ಪದ(8ಾಭ, ವಯಸು 28 ವಷ, ವ34ಯ ೌಂಡ, >ಾಸ-ನಂ.94, 05 8ೇ )ಾ#, ಸುಮ% ನಗರ, ಾಬಟಸೇೆ, )ೆ.m.ಎo ರವೊಂ,ೆ - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26177 CRL.P No. 11513 of 2024 ಸಂಪ#'ಾಯ ಬದp>ಾq ಮದು>ೆ ಆqದುc, ಮದು>ೆಯ ಎಲ\ ಖಚುನು4 ನಮ( ಅಣe8ೇ ಭFರುfಾgೆ. ಮದು>ೆtಾದ 03 ವಷದ+ೆ\ೕ ಅಂದೆ ,8ಾಂಕ 15.05.2021 ರಂದು ನನ4 ಪ% , ೕ- ರವರು )ೋ`u-19 )ಾv+ೆvಂದ 3ಧನಾqರುfಾgೆ. ನನ4 ಗಂಡ ಐ.F.ಐ.F.ಐ #ೕxೆyಯz ಇನುೇ YಾbF, ಹಣ ಕO . ನನ4 {ೆಸೆ 8ಾ|3 Yಾbರುfಾgೆ. ನನ4 ಗಂಡ 3ಧನಾದ ನಂತರ ನನ4 ಪ%ಯ }ಕ_ಪ~8ಾದ Eೆಂ,z j +ೇ ೋ`ಂದEಾ•|, ವಯಸು 48 ವಷ ರವರ €ರುಕುಳ •ಾFgtಾq, ಕೂತರು 3ಂತರೂ 'ೈ;ಕ €ರುಕುಳ )ೊಡುವ]ದು •ಾFgtಾvತು. YಾನFಕ>ಾqಯೂ tಾ>ಾಗಲೂ ಅ>ಾಚZ ಶಬcಗLಂದ Qೈಯುfಾg, 3ೕನು ಸೂaೆ )ೆಲಸ Yಾಡು ಇನು4 ಮುಂ'ೆ, 3ನೆ ಈ ಮ8ೆಯ \ •ಾಗ ಇಲ\ ಎಂದು ನನ4ನು4 ಅ>ಾಚZ ಶಬcಗLಂದ 3ಂ,F, ಮ8ೆvಂದ {ೊರೆ ನೂ€ರುfಾgೆ. ನನ4 ಗಂಡನ ಅm„ ಸೋಜ ಮತುg ಪದ(8ಾ… ರವರು ನನ4ನು4 ಅ>ಾZಚZ ಶಬcಗLಂದ 3ಂ,ಸುವ]ದು, 334ಂದ ನನ4 ಮಗ ಸ%gದುc, 3ನೆ ಅನ4 {ಾಕುವ]ದು ದಂಡ, 3ೕನು tಾರ ಹ%gರ Qೇ)ಾದರೂ {ೋq, ಹಣ fೆೆದು)ೊಂಡು Qಾ ಎಂದು {ೇಳ†fಾg, }ತ# ;ಂEೆ 3ೕಡು%gದcರು. ,8ಾಂಕ 18.02.2022 ರಂದು 35,00,000/-00 (ಮೂವfೆ‰ದು ಲŠ ), ,8ಾಂಕ: 19.02.2022 ರಂದು 2469,480/-00 (ಇಪ~ತುg 8ಾಲು_ ಲŠ ಅರವfೊgಂಬತುg Eಾ`ರದ 8ಾಲು_ ನೂರು ಎಂಬತುg) ಹಣ ನನ4 ಐ.F.ಐ.F.ಐ QಾZಂŒ •ಾfೆ/ ಸಂ•ೆZ 047801001985 ಬಂ,ರುತg'ೆ. ಈ `Iಾರವನು4 QಾZಂ€ನ YಾZ8ೇಜ ನನೆ {ೇLರುfಾgೆ. ,8ಾಂಕ 21.02.2022 ರಂದು QಾZಂ€3ಂದ ನನೆ ೕ ಬಂ,'ೆ ಎಂದು 3ೕನು ಬಂದು ಸ; {ಾಕQೇಕು ಎಂದು ನನ4 }ಕ_ Yಾವ8ಾದ Eೆಂ,z ರವರು ನನ4ನು4 ಅ'ೇ ,ನ ಕೆF)ೊಂಡರು. ಆದೆ ನನೆ ತುಂQಾ ಹುŽಾಲ\'ೇ ಆಸ~fೆ#ೆ {ೋಗQೇ€ತುg. ಆದರೂ ನನ4ನು4 ಬಲವಂತ>ಾq Qೆಳೆ• ಸುYಾರು 08.30 ಗಂೆೆ ಕೆF)ೊಂಡು Eೆಂ,z ಮತುg ಅವರ ಪ%4 ^ೕನ)ಾ ರವರು ನನ4ನು4 ಅವರ ಮ8ೆಯ \ ( >ಾಸ-ನಂ.94, 05 8ೇ )ಾ#, ಸುಮ% ನಗರ, ಾಬಟಸ ೇೆ, )ೆ.m.ಎ- ) ಕೂb {ಾ€, 01 IೆŒೆ ಸ; {ಾಕಲು {ೇLದರು. ಇದ)ೆ_ 8ಾನು ಒಪ~,'ಾcಗ Eೆಂ,z & ಆತನ {ೆಂಡ% ^ೕನ)ಾ ರವರು ನನೆ {ೊxೆದು, ಬxೆದು, mೕವ Qೆದ)ೆ {ಾ€, 3ೕನು ಸ; {ಾಕ,ದcೆ, 3ನ4ನು4 Eಾvಸುವ]'ಾq {ೆದF, ಬಲವಂತ,ಂದ 01 IೆŒೆ ಸ; {ಾ€F)ೊಂಡರು {ಾಗೂ ನ34ಂದ ಮfೆg 05 Qಾ\ಂŒ IೆŒೆ ಸ; {ಾ€F)ೊಂಡರು. ನಂತರ ನನ4 ಐ.F.ಐ.F.ಐ QಾZಂ€ನ ಾಬುŒ, ಎ.O.ಎಂ )ಾಡನು4 fೆೆದು)ೊಂಡು, ಮfೆg 3ೕನು ಏ8ಾದರೂ ಹಣ )ೇLದೆ, 3ನ4ನು4 & 3ಮ( ಅಣe8ಾದ >ೆಂಕೇ“ ರವರನು4 mೕವ ಸ;ತ jಡುವ],ಲ\ ಎಂದು - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26177 CRL.P No. 11513 of 2024 Qೆದ)ೆ {ಾ€ದರು. ನಂತರ ನನ4ನು4 ಮ8ೆvಂದ {ೊರೆ {ಾ€ದರು. ಆ ಸಮಯ)ೆ_ ನಮ( ಅಣe >ೆಂಕೇ“ ರವರು ಬಂದು ನನ4ನು4 ಕೆದು)ೊಂಡು {ೋದರು. ಆದೆ ಅ'ೇ ,ನ ಅಂದೆ ,8ಾಂಕ 21.02.2022 ರಂದು ಈಾಗ+ೇ Eೆಂ,z ರವರು ಪ'ಾ(ವ% ರವರ ಕxೆvಂದ ಸ; YಾbF)ೊಂbದc, ಪ'ಾ(ವ% ರವೆ Eೇದ IೆŒ ನಂ.853 ಮು•ಾಂತರ 60,00,000/-00 ( ಅರವತುg ಲŠ) ಹಣವನು4, Eೆಂ,z.m ರವರ QಾZಂŒ •ಾfೆೆ ಹಣ ವಾವೆ ಆqರುತg'ೆ. ಈ ಸಂಬಂದ Eೆಂ,z ರವರ ^ೕ+ೆ ದೂರು 3ೕಡಲು ,8ಾಂಕ 16.03.2022 ರಂದು ಾಬಟಸ8ೆ~ೕೆ  ೕ ಾೆೆ ಬರಲು. ಾಬಟೇೆ ಮುಂQಾಗ ಬರು%g'ಾcಗ, ಆದೆ Eೆಂ,z, ಅವರ fಾv ಸೋಜ ನನ4 ”ಾವ ಪ#,ೕ- ರವರು ಅಡ• ಬಂದು, ಾೆಯ \ ದೂರು )ೊಡQೇb, 8ಾನು 334ಂದ 60,00,000/-00 ( ಅರವತುg ಲŠ) ಹಣ 3ಮ( •ಾfೆvಂದ ವಾವೆ YಾbF)ೊಂbದುc ಸತZ. ಆದೆ ಈಗ ಆ ಹಣದ \ 3ನೆ 15,00,000/-00 ( ಹ,8ೈದು ಲŠ ) ಹಣವನು4 ,8ಾಂಕ 22.03.2022 ರಂದು )ೊಡುfೆgೕ8ೆ ಎಂದು {ೇL, Eೆಂ,z ರವರು ಮುಚ–L)ೆಯನು4 ಮಂಜು8ಾಥಯZ, ಕುO, ೆ#ೕYಾ ಾಮಮೂ%, j.)ೆ ಸುಂದೇ“ ಸಮŠಮದ \ ಬೆದು)ೊOದುc, ಸೋಜಮ( ರವರು ಹಣ )ೊಡುವ]ದು ನನ4 ಜ>ಾQಾc ಎಂದು {ೇL, ಅವರೂ ಸಹ ಸ; Yಾbರುfಾgೆ. ಆದcಂದ 8ಾನು, ನಮ( ಅಣe >ೆಂಕೇಶ.)ೆ {ಾಗೂ ಮ{ಾ ಂಗಂ ರವರು ಈ ,ನ ,8ಾಂಕ 23.03.2022 ರಂದು ಮ'ಾZಹ4 ಸುYಾರು 03.00 ಗಂೆ ಸಮಯದ \ Eೆಂ,z ರವರ ಬL {ೋq, 1500,000/-00 ( ಹ,8ೈದು ಲŠ ) ಹಣವನು4 )ೇಳ+ಾq, 8ಾನು 3ಮೆ tಾವ]'ೇ ಹಣವನು4 )ೊಡುವ],ಲ\, 3ೕವ] ಏನೂ Qೇ)ಾದರೂ Yಾb)ೋ, •ಾFg Yಾತ8ಾbದೆ 3ನ4ನು4 & 3ಮ( ಅಣeನನು4 )ೊ+ೆ Yಾbಸುfೆgೕ8ೆಂದು Qೆದ)ೆ {ಾ€ರುfಾg8ೆ. ಆದcಂದ ನನ4 8ಾ|3 {ೆಸನ \ದc ನನ4 ಗಂಡನ ಇನುೇ ಹಣದ Vತg 60,00,000/-00 ( ಅರವತುg ಲŠ) ಹಣವನು4 ವಂ}F, ವಾವೆ Yಾb)ೊಂಡು, ನನ4 ^ೕ+ೆ & ನಮ( ಅಣe ನ ^ೕ+ೆ )ೊ+ೆ Qೆದ)ೆ {ಾಕು%gರುವ Eೆಂ,z.m, ಸೋಜ, ^ೕನ)ಾ, ಪ#,ೕ- ರವರುಗಳ `ರುದp )ಾನೂನು ೕfಾZ ಕ#ಮ ಜರುqF, ನನೆ EಾYಾmಕ 8ಾZಯ )ೊbಸQೇ)ೆಂದು {ಾಗೂ ನನಗೂ & ನಮ( ಅಣe3ಗೂ ರŠೆ 3ೕಡQೇ)ಾq ಈ ಮೂಲಕ )ೇL)ೊಳ†Mfೆgೕ8ೆ. ಈ ದೂರನು4 ನಮೆ ಪಚಯ`ರುವ ೆ#ೕYಾ ಾಮಮೂ% ರವರ ಮು•ಾಂತರ ೈ- YಾbFರುfೆgೕ8ೆ." The complaint becomes a crime in Crime No.39/2022. The police conduct investigation and file a charge sheet. Summary - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26177 CRL.P No. 11513 of 2024 of the charge sheet as obtaining in column No.17 reads as follows: "17. )ೇFನ ಸಂ˜ಪg Eಾಾಂಶ ಈ 'ೋŽಾೋಪೆ ಪತ# ಅಂಕಣ 14 ರ \, ಕಂಡ 'ೊ, Eಾ˜ 01 ರವೆ, ಅಂಕಣ 12ರ \,, ಕಂಡ ಆೋi 01 ರವರ ಅಣeನ ಮಗ8ಾದ , ೕ- ರವೊಂ,ೆ ,8ಾಂಕ 19.02.2018 ರಂದು ಮಧು>ೆtಾqರುfೆg, ,8ಾಂಕ: 15.05.2021 ರಂದು 'ೋ, Eಾ˜ 01 ರವರ ಗಂಡ , ೕ- ರವರು )ೋ`u-19 )ಾv+ೆvಂದ ಮೃತಪOರುfಾgೆ, , ೕ- ರವರು ಐ.F.ಐ.F.ಐ #ೕxೆ3ಯz ಇಮ(ೇ YಾbF, ಹಣ ಕO, 'ೊ.Eಾ˜ 01 ರವರ {ೆಸೆ 8ಾ|3 YಾbFರುfಾgೆ, , o ರವರು 3ಧನಾದ ನಂತರ ಅ-01 ಂದ ಅ-04 ರವರು 'ೋ.Eಾ˜ 01 ರವೆ 'ೈ;ಕ ಮತುg YಾನFಕ €ರುಕುಳ 3ೕb, ಅ>ಾಚZ ಶಬcಗLಂದ Qೈದು 3ೕನು ಸೂaೆ )ೆಲಸ Yಾಡು “334ಂದ ನನ4 ಮಗ ಸ%gದುc 3ನೆ ಅನ4 {ಾಕುವ]ದು ದಂಡ, 3ೕನು tಾರ ಹ%#ರ Qೇ)ಾದರೂ {ೋq, ಹಣ fೆೆದು)ೊಂಡು Qಾ ಎಂದು {ೇಳ†fಾg," }ತ# ;ಂEೆ 3ೕb, 3ನೆ ಈ ಮ8ೆಯ , •ಾಗ ಇಲ,, ಎಂತ ಮ8ೆvಂದ {ೊರೆ {ಾ€ರುfಾgೆ. #ೕxೆ3ಯz ಇನು4ೇ 3ಂದ ,8ಾಂಕ: 18.02.2022 ರಂದು 35,00,000/- (ಮೂವfೆ‰ದು ಲŠ ), ,8ಾಂಕ: 19.02.2022 ರಂದು 2469,480/-00 (ಇಪ~ತುg 8ಾಲು_ ಲŠ ಅರವfೊgಂಬತುg Eಾ`ರದ 8ಾಲು_ ನೂರು ಎಂಬತುg) ಹಣ 'ೊ.Eಾ˜ 01 ರವರ ಐ.F.ಐ.F.ಐ QಾZಂŒ •ಾfೆ ಸಂ•ೆZ 047401001985 ೆ ಬಂ,ರುವ]'ಾq ಈ `Iಾರವನು4 QಾZಂ€ನ YಾZ8ೇಜ ರವರು 'ೊ.Eಾ˜ 01 ರವೆ %LFರುfಾgೆ. ನಂತರ ,8ಾಂಕ:21.02.2022 ರಂದು QಾZಂ€3ಂದ 'ೊ.Eಾ˜ 01 ೕ ಬಂ,'ೆ ಎಂದು ಆ 01 ರವರು 'ೋEಾ - 01 ರವರನು4 ತಮ( ಮ8ೆೆ ಬರYಾb)ೊಂಡು Qೆಳೆ•, ಸುYಾರು 08-30 ಗಂೆೆ ಕೆF)ೊಂಡು ಅ-01 ಂದ ಆ 04 ರವರು 'ೋ.Eಾ˜ 01 ರವರನು4 ಮ8ೆಯ ಕೂb {ಾ€, 01 IೆŒ ೆ ಸ; {ಾಕಲು {ೇLದುc, 'ೋ,Eಾ-01 ರವರು ಒಪ~,'ಾcಗ ಆೋiಗಳ† 'ೋ.Eಾ-01 ರ ರವರನು4 {ೊxೆದು mೕವQೆದ)ೆ {ಾ€, 3ೕನು ಸ; {ಾಕ,ದcೆ 3ನ4ನು4 Eಾvಸುವ]'ಾq {ೆದF, ಬಲವಂತ,ಂದ 01 IೆŒ ೆ ಸ; {ಾ€F)ೊಂಡು ನಂತರ QಾZಂŒ ೆ 3ೕಡಲು 02 )ಾZನ+ೇಷ IೆŒ ಗLೆ ಸ; {ಾ€F)ೊಂbರುfಾgೆ, 'ೋ,Eಾ˜ 01 ರವರ ತನ4 ಗಂಡನ ಮರಣ ನಂತರ ತನೆ ಬರQೇ)ಾqದc 60,00,000/- ರೂ (ಅರವತುg ಲŠ) ಇನೂೆ ಹಣವನು4 ತನ4 {ೆಸನ ,, ಅ)ೌಂ ಓಪ Yಾb ಾ#ನ› Yಾbಸುವ]'ಾq {ೇL ಆ-01 ಂದ 04 ರವರು, 'ೋ.Eಾ-01 ರವೆ VೕಸYಾb - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26177 CRL.P No. 11513 of 2024 ಮ8ೆಯ \ ಕೂb{ಾ€ ಸ;Yಾb)ೊಂಡು )ೈಗLಂದ {ೊxೆದು ಅ>ಾಚZ ಶಬcಗLಂದ Qೈದು 'ೋ,Eಾ 01 & 02 ರವೆ ಾ#ಣ Qೆದ)ೆ {ಾ€ದcಲ\'ೇ 'ೋ.Eಾ-01 ರವೆ ಕೃ%ಯನು4ಂಟು Yಾಡುವ ಉ'ೆcೕಶ,ಂದ )ೆಲವ] QಾZಂŒ 'ಾಖ+ಾ%ಗಳ \ ಸ; {ಾ€F)ೊಂಡು VೕಸYಾbರುವ]ದು ತ3•ೆvಂದ ದೃಡಪOರುತg'ೆ. ಆದcಂದ ಆೋiಗಳ `ರುದp 'ೋŽಾೋಪೆ ಪತ#." 10. If the complaint and the summary of the charge sheet are read in tandem, what would unmistakably emerge is the criminal law is set into motion for the purpose of recovery of money, notwithstanding the fact that the money is said to have been utilised by the petitioners for the purpose of the payment of medical bills for which loan had been raised by the complainant herself. In that light, permitting further proceedings against these petitioners which has been instituted for the purpose of recovery of money, would become an abuse of the process of the law. It becomes apposite to refer to the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of LALIT CHATURVEDI vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH reported in 2024 SCC OnLine SC 171, wherein it is held as follows: “…. …. …. 5. This Court, in a number of judgments, has pointed out the clear distinction between a civil wrong in the form of breach of contract, non-payment of money or disregard to and violation of the contractual terms; and a - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26177 CRL.P No. 11513 of 2024 criminal offence under Sections 420 and 406IPC. Repeated judgments of this Court, however, are somehow overlooked, and are not being applied and enforced. We will be referring to these judgments. The impugned judgment [Lalit Chaturvedi v. State of U.P., 2023 SCC OnLine All 2945] dismisses the application filed by the appellants under Section 482CrPC on the ground of delay/laches and also the factum that the charge- sheet had been filed on 12-12-2019. This ground and reason is also not valid. 6. In Mohd. Ibrahim v. State of Bihar [Mohd. Ibrahim v. State of Bihar, (2009) 8 SCC 751 : (2009) 3 SCC (Cri) 929] , this Court had referred to Section 420IPC, to observe that in order to constitute an offence under the said section, the following ingredients are to be satisfied: (SCC pp. 757-58, paras 18-19) “18. Let us now examine whether the ingredients of an offence of cheating are made out. The essential ingredients of the offence of “cheating” are as follows: (i) deception of a person either by making a false or misleading representation or by dishonest concealment or by any other act or omission; (ii) fraudulent or dishonest inducement of that person to either deliver any property or to consent to the retention thereof by any person or to intentionally induce that person so deceived to do or omit to do anything which he would not do or omit if he were not so deceived; and (iii) such act or omission causing or is likely to cause damage or harm to - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26177 CRL.P No. 11513 of 2024 that person in body, mind, reputation or property. 19. 19. To constitute an offence under Section 420, there should not only be cheating, but as a consequence of such cheating, the accused should have dishonestly induced the person deceived: (i) to deliver any property to any person, or (ii) to make, alter or destroy wholly or in part a valuable security (or anything signed or sealed and which is capable of being converted into a valuable security).” 7. Similar elucidation by this Court in V.Y. Jose v. State of Gujarat [V.Y. Jose v. State of Gujarat, (2009) 3 SCC 78 : (2009) 1 SCC (Cri) 996] , explicitly states that a contractual dispute or breach of contract per se should not lead to initiation of a criminal proceeding. The ingredient of “cheating”, as defined under Section 415IPC, is existence of a fraudulent or dishonest intention of making initial promise or representation thereof, from the very beginning of the formation of contract. Further, in the absence of the averments made in the complaint petition wherefrom the ingredients of the offence can be found out, the High Court should not hesitate to exercise its jurisdiction under Section 482CrPC. Section 482CrPC saves the inherent power of the High Court, as it serves a salutary purpose viz. a person should not undergo harassment of litigation for a number of years, when no criminal offence is made out. It is one thing to say that a case has been made out for trial and criminal proceedings should not be quashed, but - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26177 CRL.P No. 11513 of 2024 another thing to say that a person must undergo a criminal trial despite the fact that no offence has been made out in the complaint. This Court in V.Y. Jose [V.Y. Jose v. State of Gujarat, (2009) 3 SCC 78 : (2009) 1 SCC (Cri) 996] placed reliance on several earlier decisions in Hira Lal Hari Lal Bhagwati v. CBI [Hira Lal Hari Lal Bhagwati v. CBI, (2003) 5 SCC 257 : 2003 SCC (Cri) 1121 : (2003) 262 ITR 466] , Indian Oil Corpn. v. NEPC India Ltd. [Indian Oil Corpn. v. NEPC India Ltd., (2006) 6 SCC 736 : (2006) 3 SCC (Cri) 188] , Vir Prakash Sharma v. Anil Kumar Agarwal [Vir Prakash Sharma v. Anil Kumar Agarwal, (2007) 7 SCC 373 : (2007) 3 SCC (Cri) 370] and All Cargo Movers (India) (P) Ltd. v. Dhanesh Badarmal Jain [All Cargo Movers (India) (P) Ltd. v. Dhanesh Badarmal Jain, (2007) 14 SCC 776 : (2009) 1 SCC (Cri) 947] . 8. Having gone through the complaint, which was registered as an FIR and the assertions made therein, it is quite clear that Respondent 2 complainant Sanjay Garg's grievance is regarding failure of the appellants to pay the outstanding amount, in spite of Respondent 2 complainant Sanjay Garg's repeated demands. Respondent 2 complainant Sanjay Garg states that the supplies were made between the period 1-12-2015 and 6-8-2017. The appellants had made the payments from time to time of Rs 3,76,40,553 leaving a balance of Rs 1,92,91,358. 9. We will assume that the assertions made in the complaint are correct, but even then, a criminal offence under Section 420 read with Section 415IPC is not established in the absence of deception by making false and misleading representation, dishonest concealment or any other act or omission, or inducement of the complainant to deliver any - 14 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26177 CRL.P No. 11513 of 2024 property at the time of the contract(s) being entered. The ingredients to allege the offence are neither stated nor can be inferred from the averments. A prayer is made to the police for recovery of money from the appellants. The police is to investigate the allegations which discloses a criminal act. Police does not have the power and authority to recover money or act as a civil court for recovery of money. 10. The charge-sheet also refers to Section 406IPC, but without pointing out how the ingredients of the said section are satisfied. No details and particulars are mentioned. There are decisions which hold that the same act or transaction cannot result in an offence of cheating and criminal breach of trust simultaneously. [Wolfgang Reim v. State, (2012) 173 Comp Cas 86 : 2012 SCC OnLine Del 3341; Mahindra and Mahindra Financial Services Ltd. v. Delta Classic (P) Ltd., (2009) 151 Comp Cas 661 : 2009 SCC OnLine Gau 105 : (2011) 6 Gau LR 604; Mukesh Sharma v. State of H.P., 2024 SCC OnLine HP 426] For the offence of cheating, dishonest intention must exist at the inception of the transaction, whereas, in case of criminal breach of trust there must exist a relationship between the parties whereby one party entrusts another with the property as per law, albeit dishonest intention comes later. 11. In this case entrustment is missing, in fact it is not even alleged. It is a case of sale of goods. The charge-sheet does refer to Section 506IPC relying upon the averments in the complaint. However, no details and particulars are given, when and on which date and place the threats were given. Without the said details and particulars, it is apparent to us, that these allegations of threats, etc. have been made only with an intent to activate police machinery for recovery of money. - 15 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26177 CRL.P No. 11513 of 2024 12. It is for Respondent 2 complainant Sanjay Garg to file a civil suit. Initiation of the criminal process for oblique purposes, is bad in law and amounts to abuse of process of law.” (Emphasis supplied) 11. The Apex Court holds that setting the Criminal law into motion for the purpose of recovery of money should not be permitted to be continued which have to be interdicted or obliterated by the courts exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. In that light, permitting further proceedings against the petitioners which is ostensibly instituted for the purpose of recovery of money would become an abuse of the process of the law and result in miscarriage of justice. 12. For the aforesaid reasons, the following: O R D E R [I] Criminal Petition is allowed. [II] Proceedings in C.C.No.220/2023 pending before the Senior Civil Judge and Principal JMFC at K.G.F., stands quashed qua the petitioners. - 16 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26177 CRL.P No. 11513 of 2024 [III] The consequences of quashment of the order shall follow. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE CBC List No.: 2 Sl No.: 43