Judgment 1 J-APL No.197.2019.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 197 OF 2019 Gopal S/o Babulal Agrawal, Aged about 54 years, Occ. Business, R/o. Muktanand Nagar, Near Dr. Gaikwad Hospital, Nandura Road, Khamgaon, District : Buldhana. …. APPLICANT // VERSUS // 1) State of Maharashtra, Through Police Station Officer, Police Station Khamgaon City, Taluka : Khamgaon, District : Buldana. 2) Shri Anil Sakharam Shastri, Aged about 45 years, Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Society, Tahsil Police Station, Khamgaon City, District : Buldana. 3) Baburao Namdeo Solanke, R/o. Sajanpuri, Tah. Khamgaon, Dist. Buldhana. …. NON-APPLICANTS _____________________________________________________________ Mr. Mandar Deshpande, Advocate h/f. Mr. S. V. Sirpurkar, Advocate for applicant. Mr. M. J. Khan, Additional Public Prosecutor for non- applicant No.1/State. Mr. Mahesh Rai, Advocate for non-applicant No.3. _____________________________________________________________ CORAM : M.W. CHANDWANI, J. DATED : OCTOBER 12, 2026 ORAL JUDGMENT : Amended as per Courts order dated 29.9.2021 2026:BHC-NAG:13905-DB Judgment 2 J-APL No.197.2019.odt 1. Heard finally by consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties. Though served, nobody appears on behalf of non- applicant No.2. 2. The applicant seeks quashing of First Information Report (FIR) No.642/2018, dated 22.11.2018, registered with Police Station, Khamgaon City, District Buldhana for the offence punishable under Section 39 of the Maharashtra Money-Lending (Regulation) Act, 2014 (for short the “Act of 2014”). 3. The FIR indicates that applicant No.3 has filed a complaint with the Office of District Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Buldhana against the applicant alleging that the applicant is carrying an illegal money lending business. In accordance with the said complaint, as per the instruction given by the office of District Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Socities, Buldhana, a raid was conducted on 17.11.2018 at the business place of applicant as per Section 16 of the Act of 2014. During the search, suspicious document i.e. blank cheques, electric bills and sale-deeds were found. Therefore, on the complaint of non-applicant No.2/Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Society, Khamgaon, District Buldhana, the aforesaid offences came to be registered against the applicant. Judgment 3 J-APL No.197.2019.odt 4. It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the District Registrar, Money Lending and District Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Buldhana by its order dated 18th June, 2026 rejected the complaint lodged by non-applicant No.3 and held that the transaction of sale-deed belonging to land bearing Gat No.87, admeasuring 1H-21R out of total 4H-20R is not done pursuant to money lending business. According to him, the Regular Civil Suit No.69/2006 filed by the applicant against non-applicant No.3 in respect of land purchased by him from non-applicant No.3 by way of sale-deed has been decreed vide Judgment dated 10.12.2025. Therefore, the allegations made by the non-applicant No.3 do not remain and therefore, the FIR is required to be quashed and set aside. 5. Learned APP fairly submitted that in wake of the order passed by the District Registrar, Money Lending and District Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Buldhana, nothing survives in this FIR. Whereas, learned counsel appearing on behalf of non-applicant No.3 objected to the application on the ground that the FIR has been lodged by the Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Khamgaon and not by the non-applicant No.3. Both matters are different and therefore, sought rejection of the application. Judgment 4 J-APL No.197.2019.odt 6. Perusal of the FIR reveals that non-applicant No.3 had filed a complaint with the office of District Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Buldhana and on its direction a search was conducted at the business place of the applicant. In the FIR, it is alleged that some suspicious documents were seized from the applicant and accordingly the FIR came to be lodged by the Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Khamgaon. Except this, there is no other statement in the FIR. Rather, the FIR appears to be vague and lodged only on account of findings of some suspicious documents. The complaint, which is genesis of lodging the FIR, filed by non- applicant No.3 has been rejected by the District Registrar, Money Lending and District Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Buldhana vide order dated 18.06.2026. 7. That apart, the Regular Civil Suit No.69/2006 filed by the applicant against non-applicant No.3 in respect of land bearing Gat No.87 of village Shirasgaon Deshmukh has been decreed wherein, the trial Court has held that non-applicant No.3 has no right or interest in the said land. Thus, nothing remains in the said complaint and therefore, no case is made out against the applicant. It appears that the FIR is vague and is lodged merely on the assumption of the Assistant Registrar that just because some suspicious documents were found, the applicant is indulged in illegal money lending business. Judgment 5 J-APL No.197.2019.odt Without conducting any enquiry in respect of those documents, the FIR is filed. Therefore, the FIR is not sustained in the eyes of law. Hence, I find substance in the argument of the learned counsel for the applicant. 8. It will be appropriate to refer to the decision of the supreme Court in the case of State of Haryana and others Vs. Bhajan Lal and others [1992 Supp (1) SCC 335] wherein, the Court has postulated 7 categories where the Court can exercise its inherent powers to quash the FIR. Para 102 of the decision has been reproduced as under : “102. In the backdrop of the interpretation of the various relevant provisions of the Code under Chapter XIV and of the principles of law enunciated by this Court in a series of decisions relating to the exercise of the extraordinary power under Article 226 or the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code which we have extracted and reproduced above, we give the following categories of cases by way of illustration wherein such power could be exercised either to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice, though it may not be possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined and sufficiently channelised and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such power should be exercised. (1) Where the allegations made in the First Information Report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused. Judgment 6 J-APL No.197.2019.odt (2) Where the allegations in the First Information Report and other materials, if any, accompanying the F.I.R. do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code. (3) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused. (4) Where the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under Section 155(2) of the Code. (5) Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused. (6) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code or the concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party. (7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge.” 9. In view of the above discussion, a case is made out for exercising the inherent powers of this Court under Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 to quash the FIR and Judgment 7 J-APL No.197.2019.odt consequent proceedings against the applicants. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following order : (i) The Criminal Application is allowed. (ii) FIR No.642/2018, dated 22.11.2018, registered with Police Station, Khamgaon City, District Buldhana for the offence punishable under Section 39 of the Maharashtra Money-Lending (Regulation) Act, 2014, is hereby quashed and set aside, qua the applicant. 10. The criminal application is disposed of. (M.W. CHANDWANI, J.) Kirtak Signed by: Mr. B.J. Kirtak Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 15/10/2026 19:39:25