Priti Agrawal W/O Ravi Agrawal vs State of Maharashtra Thr Pso Ps Lakadganj

¶1

25apl 2051.25.odt+ connet..odt

¶2

2026:BHC-NAG:1284-DB

¶3

1

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

¶5

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 2051 OF 2025

¶6

Ravi s/o Ratankumar Agrawal, Aged Adult, Occupation : Director, R/o 2004, R.K. Villa, L-14, Swarnabhoomi, Vidhan Sabha Road, Ama Seoni, Dist. Raipur, Chattisgarh-493111 2. Gopal Kumar s/o Bhagwan Dash Agarwalla Aged Adult Occupation: Charted Accountant, R/o; C-1/12, Sectiorn 02, CSEB Sub Station, Devendra Nagar, Raipur Gunj Raipur, Chhattisgarh-493111 3. Ashok s/o Rushikesh Agrawal, Age: 60 Yrs. Occ:- Retired, R/o: A-8, Rajiv Nagar Extention, Dist. Raipur, Chhattisgarh- 492001 4. Subhash Chand s/o Mangat Ram Mittal, Age:60 Yrs. Occ. Private, R/o: House No.101, VIP Height (VIP City), Saddu, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 5. Gaind Ram s/o Panch Ram Sahu, APPLICANTS Age: 54 Yrs. Occ. Service, R/o: Kosrangi, PO: Kosrangi, Raipur, Chattisgarh // V E R S U S // 1. The State of Maharashtra, Through Police Station Officer, NON-APPLICANT Police Station, Lakasganj Dist. Nagpur 2. Sonal Agrawal w/o Manoj Agrawal

¶7

25apl 2051.25.odt+ connet..odt

¶8

2

¶9

Age:- 45 Yrs. Occ: Private, R/o: 401-Sai Pooja Apartment, Near Jalaram Mandir, Lakadgunj, Nagpur

¶10

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Mr. A.C. Jaltare, Advocate for the applicants. Mr. N.B. Jawade, APP for non-applicant No.1 /State.

¶11

¶12

WITH

¶13

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 1912 OF 2025

¶14

Mrs. Priti Agrawal w/o Ravi Agrawal Aged about 38 years, Occupation : Director, Housewife C/o: Ravi Agrawal, R/o 2004, R.K. Villa, L-14, Swarnabhoomi, Vidhan Sabha Road, Ama Seoni, Dist. Raipur, Chhattisgarh-493111 2. Mrs. Shakuntala Devi Agrawal w/o Ratan Agrawal, Age: 65 Yrs. Occ. Real Subscriber/ Director of OBCL R/o 2004, R.K. Villa, L-14, Swarnabhoomi, Vidhan Sabha Road, Ama Seoni, Dist. Raipur, Chhattisgarh-493111

¶15

// V E R S U S //

¶16

The State of Maharashtra, Through the Police Station Officer, Police Station: Lakadganj, District Nagpur 2. Mrs. Sonal Agrawal w/o Manoj Agrawal Age:- 45 Yrs. Occ: Private, R/o: 401-Sai Pooja Apartment, Near Jalaram Mandir, Lakadgunj, Nagpur

¶17

NON-APPLICANTS

¶18

25apl 2051.25.odt+ connet..odt

¶19

3

¶20

Mr. A.C. Jaltare, Advocate for the applicants. Mr. N.B. Jawade, APP for non-applicant No.1 /State.

¶21

¶22

WITH

¶23

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 1893 OF 2025

¶24

Muskaan D/o Shayam Kishor Gupta, Aged 27 years, Occupation : Company Secretary, R/o H.No.22, Salka, Bajnathpur, Surajpur, Dist. Surajpur (C.G.)

¶25

// V E R S U S //

¶26

The State of Maharashtra, Through the Police Station Officer, NON-APPLICANTS-APPLICANTSAPPLICANTS Police Station: Lakadganj, District Nagpur 2. Mrs. Sonal Agrawal w/o Manoj Agrawal Age:- 45 Yrs. Occ: Private, R/o: 401-Sai Pooja Apartment, Near Jalaram Mandir, Lakadgunj, Nagpur ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Mr. A.C. Jaltare, Advocate for the applicants. Mr. N.B. Jawade, APP for non-applicant No.1 /State.

¶27

NON-APPLICANTS-APPLICANTSAPPLICANTS

¶28

¶29

CORAM : URMILA JOSHI PHALKE, J.

¶30

JUDGMENT RESERVED ON:- 20.01.2026 JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED ON:- 27.01.2026

¶31

O R A L J U D G M E N T :

¶32

Heard.

¶33

25apl 2051.25.odt+ connet..odt

¶34

4

¶35

ADMIT . Taken up for final disposal with the consent of learned counsel for the parties.

¶36

These applications are filed by the applicants for quashing of the First Information Report in connection with crime No.940/2025 registered with the non-applicant No.2-Police Station Lakadgunj under Sections 406, 409, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120-B read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, ‘IPC’).

¶37

The crime is registered on an allegation that there was financial fraud and illegal share transferred by the members of her extended family and associated persons of M/s Orissa Bengal Carrier Ltd, which is a public listed Transport Company. The Orissa Bengal Carrier was originally started as a sole proprietary firm in the year 1980 by the father of one Ravi Agrawal namely Mr. Ratan Agrawal. In the year 1970 due to professional and financial considerations, all three sons of late Shri Rishikesh Agrawal had collectively migrated and settled in different cities for earning their livelihood. One of the son Ratan Agrawal established himself in Raipur and was running a transport business. Another son Ashok Agrawal also shifted to

¶38

25apl 2051.25.odt+ connet..odt

¶39

Raipur and started his own business. Late Shri Sajjjan Agrawal was married to Smt. Banarasi Agrawal and their only son Shri Manoj Agrawal who is husband of present complainant. As per the further allegations said Sajjan Agrawal died in the year 1995. Said Ratan Agrawal also died in 2021. As per the allegations Shri Manoj Agrawal was looking after the affairs of the company and complainant and her son was also having the shares in the said company. It is further alleged that there was a settlement between family members and in pursuance of the mentioned settlement the share owned by Mr. Manoj Agrawal complainant and their Hindu Undivided Family were gradually transferred by them in favour of Mrs Banarasi Devi Agrawal and said Banarasi Devi has transferred the same to Mr. Ravi Agrawal and his Hindu Undivided Family. As many as 13 trucks which were owned by M/s Orissa Bengal Carrier Ltd. and by transferred to Ms. Jai Durga Logistic which is firmed owned and operated by Mrs. Sonal.

¶40

In the year 2024 the dispute started between families regarding the amount of money. Mr. Manoj Agrawal was supposed to pay Mr. Ravi Agrawal out of their PPF Account as the dispute

¶41

25apl 2051.25.odt+ connet..odt

¶42

6

¶43

arose between them. It is alleged that Ravi Agrawal has received the threats from the family of the Manoj Agrawal and therefore, the complaint was filed by Mr. Ravi Agrawal to the police. Said Manoj Agrawal also sent legal notice to the company of Ravi Agrawal and there was exchange of the legal notices between them.

¶44

As the FIR came to be registered against the present applicants as above mentioned they approached to this Court for quashing of the FIR on the ground that the dispute between them is civil in nature as to the settlements of the assets and liabilities and therefore, no criminal offence is made out. During the pendency of this applications, the deed of settlement was executed between the parties and both the parties have decided to settle the dispute.

¶45

The agreement terms are filed on record. As per the said agreement terms the dispute between the parties pertains to mutual misunderstanding as the applicant Nos.1, 2, 3 and 6 and non-applicant No.2 were relatives of each other and therefore, they have decided to amicably settled the disputes to maintain the relationship between them. The settlement terms by way of joint

¶46

7

¶47

25apl 2051.25.odt+ connet..odt

¶48

affidavit filed on record. I personally verified from the parties as well as the genuineness and contents of the settlement are verified by Registrar (Judicial). Both the parties have agreed and accepted the terms of the settlement.

¶49

Thus, the situation would squarely falls within the parameters laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in State of Haryana and others Vs. Ch. Bhajanlal and others , reported in AIR 1992 SC 604, the continuation of proceeding would be of no relevance and, therefore, no purpose would be served in continuing the same. Thus, to secure the ends of justice it would be appropriate to quash the F.I.R. stated (supra) so that peace is brought between the parties interse. Thus, the ends of justice would justify exercise of inherent power under Section 482 since ultimate consequence may be an acquittal. The continuation of criminal proceeding would thus be an exercise of futility and justice in the case demands that the dispute between the parties is to an end and peace is restored securing the ends of justice being ultimate guiding factor.

¶50

Thus, continuing of the present proceeding which is lodged in pursuance of FIR bearing Crime No.940/2025 would be

¶51

8

¶52

25apl 2051.25.odt+ connet..odt

¶53

an exercise in futility. I therefore, no hesitation to quash the said FIR registered under Sections 406, 409, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 34 and 120-B.

¶54

It is however to be noted that entire police machinery was set in motion by the non-applicant No.2 as also the applicants and thereafter matter is amicably settled. The police machinery have spared their time in investigating the matters recording the statements of the witnesses. It would therefore, in the interests of justice to impose costs on the applicants as well as non-applicant No.2.

¶55

Hence, I proceed to pass the following order:-

¶56

ORDER

¶57

(i) The Criminal Applications are allowed.

¶58

(ii) The First Information Report in connection with

¶59

crime No.940/2025 dated 11.11.2025 registered with the non-applicant No.2-Police Station Lakadganj under Sections 406, 409, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120-B read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code is quashed and set aside to the extent of applicants namely Ravi s/o Ratankumar Agrawal, Gopal Kumar s/o Bhagwan Dash Agarwalla, Ashok s/o Rushikesh

¶60

25apl 2051.25.odt+ connet..odt

¶61

9

¶62

Agrawal, Subhash Chand s/o Mangat Ram Mittal, Gaind Ram s/o Panch Ram Sahu, Mrs. Priti Agrawal w/o Ravi Agrawal, Mrs. Shakuntala Devi Agrawal w/o Ratan Agrawal and Muskan D/o Shyam Kishor Gupta.

¶63

(iii) However, the applicants as also non-applicant No.2 are directed to pay costs of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakhs Only) each.

¶64

(iv) The said costs be deposited in the “Public Welfare Account” bearing No.129712010001014, IFSC Code No.UBIN0812978 with Union Bank of India, High Court Branch, Civil Lines, Nagpur.

¶65

(v) The order will come into effect after depositing

¶66

the costs.

¶67

(vi) The compliance report to be filed before this

¶68

Court.

¶69