Petition to quash an FIR under Section 420 IPC alleging cheating over a property deal and withheld profit share. The State reported that a charge-sheet had already been filed. The Court dismissed the petition, leaving the petitioner free to pursue appropriate remedies against the charge-sheet.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
CRMP No. 595 of 2019
Mange Ram Agrawal S/o Late Kedarnath Agrawal Aged About 67 Years R/o Near Agresan Bhawan Bilha P.S. Bilha, Tahsil Bilha District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.
---- Petitioner
Versus
---- Respondents
(Cause-title taken from Case Information System)
For Petitioner : Mr. Amit Kumar, Advocate. : For Respondent Nos.1 & 2 /State Mr. Amit Buxy, Panel Lawyer
Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Hon'ble Mr. Sachin Singh Rajput, Judge
Order on Board
Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
14/06/2024
1. Heard Mr. Amit Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. Amit Buxy, learned Panel Lawyer, appearing for the State/respondent Nos.1 & 2.
2. The instant petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner being aggrieved by registration of First Information Report No. 33317068180177 dated 20.06.2018 registered in Police Station Bilha, District Bilaspur for offence punishable under Section 420 of IPC against the petitioner by respondent No.3.
2
3. The facts, in brief, as projected by the petitioner is that the respondent No.3 lodged written report to Superintendent of Police, Bilaspur against the petitioner stating that in the year 2012 one agreement was executed between the petitioner and the respondent No.3 about dealing of property business. As per allegation of respondent No.3, he has invested Rs. 30,00,000/- to purchase the land from the owner of the property and the petitioner sold out that property to other persons without knowledge of respondent No.3 and not gave 60% of project to the respondent No.3. On the basis of said written report, respondent No.2 had registered aforesaid FIR against the petitioner. Hence, this petition.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the allegation concerning about the cheating against the petitioner has not been evidence by any material on record. He further submits that as per allegation stated in FIR the dispute between the parties was a civil dispute resulting from a breach of contract about share of the percentage of profit about sold land. The same would not constitute the the offence of cheating against the petitioner, therefore, Section 420 of IPC cannot attract.
5. On the other hand, Mr. Amit Buxy, learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the State/respondent submits that he has checked the status of the present case and according to the status report, the charge-sheet has already been filed against the petitioner before the concerned Court.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner does not rebut the same.
3
7. Considering the submissions advanced by the learned State counsel that the charge sheet has already been filed against the petitioner before the concerned Court, the present petition under Section 482 CrPC is dismissed . However, the petitioner is at liberty to avail appropriate remedy in accordance with law, if aggrieved by the charge-sheet.
Sd/- Sd/- (Sachin Singh Rajput) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice
Chandra
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the FIR under Section 420 IPC based on a contractual profit-sharing dispute should be quashed under Section 482 CrPC.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Mange Ram Agrawal
State of Chhattisgarh through District Magistrate Bilaspur
Station House Officer, Police Station Bilha
E Ramendra Rao
Ramesh Sinha
Sachin Singh Rajput
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
