Bombay High Court Quashed FIR and Charge-Sheet Against Hospital Directors — Purely Civil Dispute With No Criminality Involved Tagline: No Ingredients of Cheating Established — Criminal Proceedings Termed an Abuse of Law Headnote: Acts and Sections Discussed: Constitution of India (COI) — Article 226 (Writ Jurisdiction) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 482 (Inherent Powers of High Court) Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 418 (Cheating With Knowledge), Section 420 (Cheating and Dishonest Inducement), Section 34 (Acts Done by Several Persons in Furtherance of Common Intention) Keywords:Writ Jurisdiction — Quashing of FIR — Commercial Transaction — Civil Suit — Non-Payment of Dues — Abuse of Process — No Criminal Offence Nature of the Litigation:Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking quashing of FIR and charge-sheet. Petitioners’ Relief Sought:Quashing of FIR No.98 of 2020 lodged at Bhosari Police Station and the charge-sheet arising from it. Reason for Filing the Case:Allegations of non-payment of professional dues and financial aid advanced to the hospital. Prior Decisions:Special Civil Suit No.1161 of 2018 filed by the complainant for recovery of Rs.53,11,652/- was pending before the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Pune. Issues:Whether the dispute between the parties was of a civil or criminal nature, and whether criminal proceedings were maintainable alongside a pending civil suit. Submissions/Arguments:(a) Petitioners: FIR related to events preceding their control of the hospital — No criminal intention or inducement established — Civil suit already instituted for the same financial claims. (b) Respondents: Civil and criminal proceedings can proceed simultaneously — Alleged WhatsApp messages demonstrated promises to clear dues. Decision:FIR and charge-sheet quashed — Court held that the case was purely civil in nature, with no elements of cheating or criminality — Proceedings deemed an abuse of process of law. Ratio:No criminal offence was made out against the petitioners — Allegations of non-payment related to a period before the petitioners took control of the hospital — Civil remedy already sought by the complainant — No dishonest inducement proven as required under Sections 415 and 420 of IPC. Relevant Paragraphs:Paras 9, 10, and 11 of the judgment outline the court’s rationale for quashing the FIR and charge-sheet.

• 2