Madhya Pradesh High Court
Smt. Anjana Agrawal vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 24 March, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:27076
1 MCRC-12677-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE HIMANSHU JOSHI
ON THE 24 th OF MARCH, 2026
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 12677 of 2025
SMT. ANJANA AGRAWAL AND OTHERS
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Balaji Akillawar - Advocate for petitioners.
Shri Manoj Kushwaha - Panel Lawyer for the State.
Shri Atul Choudhari - Advocate for respondent No.2.
ORDER
This petition under Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita,
2023 (BNSS) has been preferred seeking quashment of FIR dated 17.10.2022
registered at Police Station Civil Lines, District Satna for offences under Sections
420/34 IPC (now corresponding provisions under BNS) of Crime No.668/22 and
all consequential proceedings pending before the Court of Judicial Magistrate First
Class, Satna.
2. Factual matrix of the case is that an agreement was executed between the
petitioners and respondent No.2 on 06.10.2017. Disputes arose between the parties
regarding performance of the said agreement. After a lapse of nearly five years, the
respondent No.2 lodged an FIR on 17.10.2022 alleging cheating. Significantly. the
respondent No.2 has also filed a civil suit for specific performance on 12.12.2022,
demonstrating that the dispute arises out of contractual obligations.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that filing of civil suit for specific
performance clearly shows that the dispute is contractual, FIR lodged after an
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PANKAJ NAGLE
Signing time: 10-04-2026
10:50:53
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:27076
2 MCRC-12677-2025
inordinate delay indicates mala fide intention. No material to show dishonest
intention at the inception of the agreement. Criminal proceedings have been
initiated to pressurize the petitioners, suit for specific performance already filed
and remedy under Section 138 NI Act could have been invoked.
4. Learned Panel Lawyer for the State and the respondent No.2 have submitted
that the FIR discloses commission of cognizable offence, existence of civil remedy
does not bar criminal prosecution and at this stage, only prima facie case is to be
seen.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
6. Admittedly, agreement dated 06.10.2017 exists and a civil suit for specific
performance has been filed. This clearly establishes that the dispute arises out of
contractual obligations, hence civil in nature. Filing of civil suit for specific
performance shows that the respondent No.2 himself considers the dispute to be
civil and the criminal law is being invoked additionally to exert pressure. In the
case of “Vesa Holdings Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Kerala (2015) 8 SCC 293 ” in which it
is clearly mentioned that Criminal proceedings should not be used to settle civil
disputes. Similarly, in the case of “Kapil Agarwal v. Sanjay Sharma, (2021) 5
SCC 524 ” the Supreme Court quashed FIR observing that Criminal law cannot be
used as a pressure tactic in civil disputes.
7. To constitute offence of cheating, there must be dishonest intention at the time
of entering into the contract. In the present case, the FIR does not disclose such
intention and allegations pertain to non-performance of agreement. Thus, essential
ingredient of cheating is absent. In the case of “Dalip Kaur v. Jagnar Singh, AIR
2009 SC 3191″ it was held by the Apex Court that mere breach of contract does
not constitute cheating.
8. The FIR lodged after five years of agreement and no satisfactory explanation
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PANKAJ NAGLE
Signing time: 10-04-2026
10:50:53
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:27076
3 MCRC-12677-2025
for delay has been given. This indicates that the criminal proceedings are an
afterthought. In cases involving purely contractual disputes and when there is
absence of criminal ingredients Police ought to act cautiously and not convert civil
disputes into criminal cases.
9. This Court is of the considered opinion that the dispute is purely civil in
nature. No ingredients of offence under Section 420 of the IPC are made out. The
FIR is manifestly attended with mala fide , continuation of proceedings would
amount to abuse of process of law. The facts reveal that a civil dispute is being
given criminal colour, FIR filed with oblique motive and is an attempt to harass
the petitioners. Such conduct falls within the category of abuse of process as laid
down in “State of Haryana versus Bhajan Lal, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335.”
10. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The FIR dated 17.10.2022 bearing
Crime No.668/22 registered at Police Station Civil Lines, Satna is hereby quashed.
All consequential criminal proceedings pending before the JMFC are also set
aside.
11. It is clarified that the respondent No.2 shall be at liberty to pursue civil
remedies in accordance with law.
(HIMANSHU JOSHI)
JUDGE
pn
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PANKAJ NAGLE
Signing time: 10-04-2026
10:50:53
