The applicants, a partnership firm named “Sagacious Impex,” invoked the inherent powers of the court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash an FIR (Crime No. 272/2023) registered at Ganeshpeth Police Station, Nagpur, for cheating (Section 420 IPC) in a commercial dispute with Pargan Singapore PTE Ltd. The dispute arose over the non-payment for 210 MT of Soybean supplied by the non-applicants. The applicants argued that it was a civil dispute turned criminal to pressurize them. The court found that the allegations did not disclose any fraudulent intent from the beginning and that the case was of a civil nature. The court quashed the FIR to prevent abuse of the legal process and avoid harassment of the applicants.

Background:

• Applicants’ firm "Sagacious Impex" involved in agro commodity trading.
• Non-applicant No. 3, Pargan Singapore PTE Ltd., is a Singapore-based company also trading in agro commodities.
• Dispute arose over a 2021 order for 210 MT Soybean worth Rs. 1,56,82,885.

FIR Allegations:

• Applicants placed order, received goods but did not pay.
• Dispute over Non-GMO certificate required for clearance.
• Non-applicants supplied certificates, but applicants claimed they were unauthenticated.

Applicants' Argument:

• It was a commercial transaction of civil nature.
• Dispute over documentation, not a criminal matter.
• Arbitration clause in the contract for dispute resolution.
• Raised jurisdiction issue as the transaction occurred outside Nagpur.

Non-Applicants' Argument:

• Applicants received and sold goods without paying.
• Non-GMO certificate was authenticated.
• Criminal action justified alongside civil remedies.

Court's Analysis:

• Reviewed documents and communication between parties.
• No evidence of fraudulent intent from the beginning.
• Dispute over non-supply of valid documents.
• Continuous business transactions between parties.
• Arbitration clause indicates civil nature of dispute.

Legal References:

• Supreme Court decisions cited to support both parties.
• Distinction between civil breach of contract and criminal cheating.
• Parameters for quashing FIR under Section 482 CrPC.

Conclusion:

• FIR did not disclose ingredients of cheating.
• Dispute is predominantly civil commercial in nature.
• Quashing FIR to prevent harassment and abuse of process.

Court's Decision:

• FIR No. 272/2023 quashed.
• Application allowed and disposed of accordingly.