Raghuvir Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 4352 MP

                                  1                          MCRC-51691-2020
        The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                  MCRC-51691-2020
   (RAGHUVINDAR SINGH AND ANOTHER Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)


Gwalior, Dated : 16-08-2021
      Shri Anand Vinod Bhardwaj, learned counsel for the petitioners.

      Smt.    Abha Mishra, learned Govt. Advocate for the respondent

no.1/State.

Shri Pawan Nagori, learned counsel for the respondent no.2. Heard finally with the consent of learned counsel for the parties.

The petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing the First Information Report dated 30.06.2020 registered at Crime No.0251/2020 by Police Station-Padav, Gwalior for offence punishable under Sections 406 and 120-B of IPC.

The brief facts of the case reveals that a report was lodged by the Manager of respondent no.2-M/s Dabar Editives at Police Station-Padav, Gwalior against the M/s Modi Nagar Paper Mills Ltd.(for short "the Company") and its co-directors including the present petitioners, alleging that the complainant/respondent no.2 has sold and supplied goods to the

Company, but no payment was made and the directors have thereby committed criminal breach of trust.

Shri A.V.Bhardwaj, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners stated that according to the complaint the goods were supplied between 24.04.2018 to 15.05.2018. The petitioners were not the directors at the relevant time. Referring to the documents Form No.DIR-12 (Annexure/D) submitted by the Company before the ROC,Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh, it is contended that they were appointed as Additional Directors in the Company only on 28.01.2019 and had no knowledge of the transactions that happened with the respondent no.2 prior to their appointment. It is contended that no case under Sections 406 and 120-B of IPC is made out against them as the allegations made in the FIR are with regard to non-payment for the goods supplied by the respondent no.2 which is primarily a civil dispute, in respect of which the 2 MCRC-51691-2020 respondent no.2 has earlier filed Civil Suit No.41-B/2019 before 2nd Civil Judge, Class-I, Gwalior on 08.05.2019. The trial Court passed an ex-parte decree on 19.12.2019 against the Company and its directors, directing them to pay Rs.8,45,175/- with 12% interest to the respondent no.2 herein.

It is submitted that the bills mentioned in the FIR are the same in

respect of which decree dated 19.12.2019 has already been passed, and suppressing this fact the impugned FIR was lodged just to pressurize the petitioners to pay the decretal amount which is nothing but abuse of process of law and cannot be sustained.

Shri Pawan Nagori, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no.2 has filed an affidavit dated 26.07.2021 of the proprietor of respondent no.2 on record in which it is stated that they have initiated the proceedings against the present petitioners on the basis of information collected online. Later on, he came to know that the petitioners had joined the Company later on, therefore, he has no objection if the petition is allowed.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. In the present case, FIR was lodged alleging criminal breach of trust on the ground of non-payment for the goods supplied which prima facie is a dispute of civil nature occurred between the parties during a business transaction for which a civil suit has already been filed by the respondent no.2 in the year 2019, copy of the judgment and decree dated 19.12.2019 is available on record as Annexure-C which reveals that an ex-parte decree for Rs.8,45,175/- has already been passed against the Company and the directors much prior to lodging of present FIR. Admittedly, the petitioners joined the Company after the period of transaction in question, and in absence of any allegations and material to show that the petitioners were incharge or responsible for the conduct of the business of the Company at the relevant time which had given rise to the offence, vicarious liability cannot be fastened on the petitioners. From any angle of the matter, the petitioners cannot be compelled to face the criminal trial in the case. Putting the law into motion is 3 MCRC-51691-2020 not a matter of course to settle the score between the parties which is more in the nature of civil dispute. The parties cannot be permitted to set the criminal law into motion and the Courts cannot be a mere spectator to it, especially when a civil dispute has already been adjudicated in respect of the transaction alleged in the FIR. This is nothing but a sheer abuse of process of law.

For the foregoing reasons and on consideration of totality of facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the impugned FIR dated 30.06.2020 registered at Crime No.0251/2020 by Police Station-Padav, Gwalior against the petitioners cannot be sustained and is hereby quashed. The petition is allowed.

Certified copy/e-copy as per rules/directions.

(NANDITA DUBEY) JUDGE

jk.

JITIN KUMAR CHOURASIA 2021.08.18 16:54:41 +05'30'