According to the prosecution case, between 03.02.2014 and 08.03.2014, the petitioner had purchased total quantity of 2086 bags of paddy from the second respondent under nine bills.The cost of the paddy so purchased was Rs.19,48,834/-.Thus, according to the complainant, the petitioner had paid a total sum of Rs.2,25,000/- towards partial discharge of the said liability.The balance was Rs.17,23,834/-.The petitioner is one of the accused in Crime No.132 of 2014 on the file of the first respondent alleging that the petitioner along with another accused committed offences punishable under Sections 420 and 506 of I.P.C. On the ground that the registration of the said case and continuance of the investigating amounts to clear abuse of process of law, the petitioner has come up with this petition seeking to quash the F.I.R. and the connected proceedings.I have heard Mr.R.Gandhi, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr.M.Maharaja, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the first respondent and Mr.S.Ananthanarayanan, learned counsel appearing for the second respondent.I have also perused the records carefully.The first respondent Mr.Gunasekaran, Inspector of Police, Tirupattur Town Police Station, is also present along with the records.I have the benefit of going through the entire case diary also.A perusal of that records and the F.I.R. would go to show that the petitioner was doing paddy and rice business in Tirupattur in the name and style 'J.K.Traders'.The second respondent is also doing the same business in Tirupanipettai, Tiruvidaimaruthur Taluk, Thanjavur District.According to the further case of the prosecution, when the second respondent demanded payment of dues, the petitioner declined to pay the same and instead he had threatened him along with his manager namely the second accused.On these allegations, the F.I.R. was registered by the first respondent on 01.05.2014, for offences punishable under Sections 420 and 506 of I.P.C.The learned senior counsel Mr.R.Gandhi, appearing for the petitioner, would submit that assuming that the allegations contained in the F.I.R. and other events which came to light during subsequent investigation are true, the same would only make out a pure and simple civil dispute and these allegations do not make out any offence more particularly offences punishable under Sections 420 or 506 of I.P.C. Therefore, according to the learned senior counsel, the registration of the F.I.R. and continuance of the investigation amounts to clear abuse of process of law and therefore the entire proceedings commencing from F.I.R. should be quashed.Since the entire case is quashed, the rice bags seized from the rice mill of the petitioner shall be returned by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.1, Tirupattur to the petitioner unconditionally under Section 452 of Cr.P.C. The vehicle already released to the petitioner on conditional basis shall be retained by the petitioner unconditionally as provided under Section 452 of Cr.P.C.With the above directions, this criminal original petition is allowed and the case in Crime No.132 of 2014 is quashed.Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.S.NAGAMUTHU,J.The Judicial Magistrate No.1, Tirupattur.The Inspector of Police, Tirupattur Town Police Station, Vellore District.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.O.P.No.20776 of 2014and M.P.No.1 of 201427.10.2014

Cited provisions: Section 420 in The Indian Penal Code; Section 415 in The Indian Penal Code; Section 506 in The Indian Penal Code