Brijesh Kumar Shah vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:88510
1 MCRC-42644-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR

BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE HIMANSHU JOSHI
nd
ON THE 2 OF NOVEMBER, 2026
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 42644 of 2026
CNR No.: MPHC010637072026
BRIJESH KUMAR SHAH
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ANR
Appearance:
Shri Ashok Kumar Shah - Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Atul Dwivedi - P.L. for the respondent/State.
ORDER
The petitioner has filed the present petition seeking quashment of FIR
bearing Crime No.1054/2024, registered at Police Station Waidhan, District
Singrauli (M.P.) for punishable of offence under Section 296, 127(1), 351(2),
3(5) of BNS and Section 3(4) of the Madhya Pradesh Protection of Debtors
Act and proceedings pending before the JFMC, if any.
2. As per prosecution story, in brief, is that the complainant, Santosh
Kumar Shah, son of Shri Shiv Prasad Shah, aged about 33 years, resident of
Bilauji, Police Station Baidhan, District Singrauli (M.P.), lodged a written
complaint at the police station alleging that on 01.08.2021, he had borrowed
a sum of Rs. 5,000/- from the applicant at an interest rate of Rs. 500/- per
month and had been regularly paying the said monthly interest. He further
alleged that on 25.07.2024, at about 12:15 p.m., while he was proceeding in
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: JASLEEN SINGH
SALUJA
Signing time: 03-11-2026
14:34:56

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:88510
2 MCRC-42644-2026
his car towards St. Joseph School to pick up children, upon reaching Bilauji,

in front of the government residence of Devesh Pandey, Municipal
Corporation, the applicant along with her associate, namely, the alleged
Manager Reshma Khan, wife of Ishaq Khan, resident of Talab Road,
Ghurital, Baidhan, intercepted his vehicle and started abusing him in filthy
language, including abuses directed towards his mother and sister. When he
objected to the same, they allegedly threatened him by stating that if he failed
to repay the amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- along with interest, they would kill
him. Reshma Khan also allegedly threatened to implicate him in a false case.
Accordingly, he lodged the report seeking appropriate action. A copy of the
FIR has been filed as Annexure A/1. After completion of the investigation,
the police filed the charge-sheet against the petitioners. It is contended on
behalf of the petitioners that the FIR registered against them, as well as the
consequential charge-sheet, is false and based on a misconception of facts.
Accordingly, the petitioners have preferred the present application under
Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking
quashment of the FIR and the entire charge-sheet.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned FIR
and the consequential charge-sheet deserve to be quashed, as the criminal
proceedings have been initiated with mala fide intention and are an abuse of
the process of law. It is submitted that the petitioner is a duly licensed
moneylender under the Money-Lenders Act and a copy of the licence has
been filed as Annexure A/2. Respondent No. 2 had borrowed money from
the petitioner and had also issued a cheque towards repayment of the loan.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: JASLEEN SINGH
SALUJA
Signing time: 03-11-2026
14:34:56

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:88510
3 MCRC-42644-2026
As the amount was not repaid, the petitioner presented the cheque before the

bank, which was dishonored due to insufficiency of funds. Consequently, the
petitioner initiated proceedings against respondent No. 2 under Section 138
of the Negotiable Instruments Act, which are pending before the competent
Court. A copy of the complaint filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable
Instruments Act has been filed as Annexure A/3. Learned counsel further
submits that the present FIR has been lodged as a counterblast to the
proceedings initiated by the petitioner under Section 138 of the Negotiable
Instruments Act. It is contended that when the petitioner demanded
repayment of the borrowed amount, respondent No. 2, instead of repaying
the same, lodged a false report against the petitioner with mala fide intention.
It is further submitted that respondent No. 2, being a Councilor, got the
complaint lodged against the petitioner through a third person associated
with him. In this regard, a copy of the application submitted before the police
station has been filed as Annexure A/4. Learned counsel also submits that
although the FIR was registered in the year 2024, charges have not yet been
framed by the learned Trial Court. It is contended that the allegations
levelled against the petitioners in the FIR and the consequential charge-sheet
filed in connection with Crime No. 1054/2024, registered at Police Station
Waidhan, District Singrauli (M.P.), are inherently improbable and do not
disclose a sustainable case against the petitioners. The impugned proceedings
have been initiated with an ulterior motive and are liable to be quashed. In
support of his submissions, learned counsel places reliance upon the
judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Manoj Mahavir Prasad Khaitan v.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: JASLEEN SINGH
SALUJA
Signing time: 03-11-2026
14:34:56

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:88510
4 MCRC-42644-2026
Ram Gopal Poddar and Another, reported in (2010) 10 SCC 673, particularly

paragraph 12 thereof, wherein the Supreme Court has observed that the High
Court is empowered to exercise its inherent jurisdiction where the allegations
are so absurd that no reasonable person would accept them, and that such
powers serve as a safeguard against injustice.
4. Learned counsel for the respondent/State opposes the petition and
submits that the FIR contains specific allegations regarding abuse, criminal
intimidation and threats extended by the petitioners to the complainant. It is
contended that the defence raised by the petitioners involves disputed
questions of fact, which cannot be examined in the present proceedings. It is
further submitted that the investigation has been completed and the charge-
sheet has been filed, disclosing a prima facie case against the petitioners.
Hence, no ground for interference under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 is
made out, and the petition deserves to be dismissed.
5. Upon perusal of the record, it reveals that specific allegations are
attributed to the petitioner. There is a prima-facie material on record
indicating that essential ingredients of Sections under Section 296, 127(1),
351(2), 3(5) of BNS and Section 3(4) of the Madhya Pradesh Protection of
Debtors Act is made out against him. The averments contained in the FIR
clearly spell out the essential ingredients of the said offences and attribute a
definite role to the petitioner, which cannot be brushed aside as vague or
omnibus. At the stage of considering a petition for quashment, this Court is
not expected to undertake a detailed appreciation of evidence or assess the
probable defence of the petitioner. The defence raised by the petitioner
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: JASLEEN SINGH
SALUJA
Signing time: 03-11-2026
14:34:56

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:88510
5 MCRC-42644-2026
involves disputed questions of fact, including denial of the allegations and

justification of the alleged conduct, which can only be examined after parties
lead evidence during trial. Such disputed question of facts cannot ordinarily
be adjudicated upon in a proceedings under Section 528 of BNS.
6. Consequently, this petition being devoid of merits and substance
is hereby dismissed.
(HIMANSHU JOSHI)
JUDGE
Jasleen

Signature Not Verified
Signed by: JASLEEN SINGH
SALUJA
Signing time: 03-11-2026
14:34:56