- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:31554 CRL.P No. 8143 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 8143 OF 2019 BETWEEN: 1. RUTHIKA ARAVIND AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, DIRECTOR, MURTHY EXPORTS PVT. LTD., NO.3-4-23/1, BHARAT BUILDING, KACHIGUDA, HYDERABAD. ALSO AT: NO.1-9-22, AZAD NAGARA, STATION ROAD, RAICHUR - 584 101. 2. SANJAY AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, DIRECTOR, MURTHY EXPORTS PVT. LTD., NO.3-4-23/1, BHARAT BUILDING, KACHIGUDA, HYDERABAD. ALSO AT: NO.1-9-22, AZAD NAGARA, STATION ROAD, RAICHUR - 584 101. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI ABHAY RAJIV SHIVAM, ADVOCATE FOR SRI SANTOSH S. NAGARALE, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH NANJANGUDU RURAL POLICE, Digitally signed by ANUSHA V Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:31554 CRL.P No. 8143 of 2019 REP BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING, BANGALORE - 560 001. 2. SRI SHANKAR SENIOR MANAGER FINANCE AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, FACTORY WORKER, M/S. SUPREME PHARMACEUTICALS MYSORE PVT. LTD., HAVING REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.74 AND 48, P-1, KIADB INDUSTRIAL AREA, NANJANAGUDU, MYSURU DISTRICT - 571 301. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI JAVEED S., HCGP FOR R1; SRI SRIDHARA HEGDE, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 PRAYING TO QUASH THE PRIVATE COMPLAINT PROCEEDINGS IN PCR NO.353/2018, PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE PRL.CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, NANJANGUD, AT MYSURE AND ALSO FIR FILED BY RESPONDENT POLICE IN CR.NO.21/2019 FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 409,415,417 AND 418 OF IPC, IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.2 AND 3 ARE CONCERNED. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:31554 CRL.P No. 8143 of 2019 ORAL ORDER Challenging entire proceedings in PCR no.353/2018, on file of Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Nanjangud at Mysore, and registration of crime for offence punishable under Sections 409, 415, 417 and 418 of Indian Penal Code, 1860, this petition is filed. 2. Sri Abhay Rajiv Shivam, learned counsel appearing for Santhosh S Nagarale, advocate for petitioners submitted that on an allegation of failure to supply material as agreed or returning advance amount received for supply of same, respondent - complainant had filed OS no.487/2016 before III Additional Senior Civil Judge at Mysore, which came to be decreed on 05.01.2018 and even after decree, accused- judgment debtors therein had failed to repay amount, thereby exhibiting intention of cheating complainant-respondent, a private complaint as at Annexure-A was filed. Based on said complaint, Crime no.21/2019 was registered. Relying upon decision of this Court in Criminal Petition no.201335/2025 [2025:KHC-K:6821] (Dinesh Putran's case) it was submitted that this Court had held invocation of criminal jurisdiction for an entirely civil dispute would not be justified and amounted to - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:31554 CRL.P No. 8143 of 2019 abuse of process and quashed proceedings. It was submitted that since very basis of complaint is alleged failure by accused to honour decree passed by trial Court in suit, wherein respondent-complainant is having remedy of execution, learned counsel submitted that continuation of proceedings herein would amount to abuse of process and sought for quashing same. 3. Learned HCGP for respondent no.1 opposed petition. None appears for respondent no.2-complainant. Since matter is of year 2019, same is taken up for disposal. 4. This petition is by accused challenging entire proceedings in private complaint filed by respondent no.2- complainant. Main ground of challenge is that dispute between parties was entirely civil in nature and based on decree of a Civil Court. A bare perusal of complaint at Annexure-A reveals statement that on an allegation of failure to repay advance money on supply of goods, OS no.487/2016 was filed by complainant which was decreed directing accused herein to return advance amount with interest at 6% p.a. and even thereafter accused had failed to repay amount and thereby exhibited intention to cheat complainant. To a Court query, - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:31554 CRL.P No. 8143 of 2019 learned counsel for petitioner - accused submitted that there was absolutely no allegation of cheating against petitioners- accused in suit and invention of same was only to initiate impugned proceedings. 5. Perusal of judgment in Dinesh Putran's case as well as that of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sachin Garg v. State of Uttar Pradesh reported in (2024) 11 SCC 687, it is settled law that parties to a civil dispute cannot be permitted to invoke criminal jurisdiction to settle civil dispute. Besides offences alleged, namely, criminal breach of trust and cheating would run counter to each other, offence of cheating would arise only in case any act were to be done with intention of cheating, whereas, criminal breach of trust would arise in case of misappropriation of property after its lawful entrustment. 6. In view of above, continuation of impugned proceedings would be abuse of process. Therefore, petition is allowed. Proceedings in PCR no.353/2018 on file of Principal Civil Judge (Jr. Dvn.) and JMFC, Nanjangud at Mysuru and also FIR filed by respondent police in Crime no.21/2019 for offence - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:31554 CRL.P No. 8143 of 2019 punishable under Sections 409, 415, 417 and 418 of IPC, stands quashed insofar as petitioners are concerned. Sd/- (RAVI V HOSMANI) JUDGE YKL List No.: 1 Sl No.: 22