JUDGMENT : Anil Kumar Choudhary, J. 1. Heard the parties. 2. No one turns up on behalf of the opposite party no.2 in-spite of repeated calls even if the notice has been validly served upon the opposite party no.2. 3. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with a prayer to quash the F.I.R. of Sonari P.S. Case No. 156 of 2021 registered for the offence punishable under Section 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506 & 120B of the Indian Penal Code. 4. Perusal of the record reveals that the allegations against the petitioners are that the petitioner no.1 is a partnership firm and the petitioner nos. 2 to 4 are the partners of the said partnership firm. The petitioner nos. 2 & 3 on behalf of the petitioner no.1 approached the complainant and asked him to supply certain articles with a promise to make payment. The complainant supplied articles worth Rs.39,43,412/-. Later on, the petitioner nos. 2 & 3 being the signing authority issued a cheque for a sum of Rs.16,63,412/- dated 22.07.2020. The cheque was dishonoured for insufficient funds. The complainant tried to contact the petitioners but the petitioners avoided the complainant on the one pretext or the other and later on showed their inability to pay the same in response to the notice. The petitioners paid only Rs.3,00,000/- in installments. 5. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the investigation of the case is going on and charge sheet has not yet been submitted. It is then submitted that the allegations against the petitioners are false. It is next submitted that allegations made in the complaint which upon being referred to police under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., the F.I.R. of this case has been registered, relates to non-payment of part of the dues that too without any document to show any entrustment of any property to the petitioners nor the date, time and place of entrustment of any property has been mentioned anywhere in the F.I.R. Hence, it is submitted that the allegations against the petitioners are vague and this case has been foisted to harass the petitioners by giving a cloak of criminal offence to a purely alleged civil dispute. 6. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioners drawing attention of this Court to the supplementary affidavit dated 24.02.2023 submits that even the civil dispute has been settled in the Mediation Centre, Jamshedpur in connection with A.B.P. No. 1713 of 2021. Drawing attention of this Court to annexure-5/2 of the supplementary affidavit at page nos. 6-7, it is submitted that much of the amount has been paid by the petitioners to the complainant and the complainant has also no grievance, hence the complainant has not turned up before this Court even after receipt of notice in this case. 7. Relying upon the Judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Binod Kumar & Others vs. State of Bihar & Another reported in (2014) 10 SCC 663 , paragraph-18 of which reads as under :- “18. In the present case, looking at the allegations in the complaint on the face of it, we find that no allegations are made attracting the ingredients of Section 405 IPC. Likewise, there are no allegations as to cheating or the dishonest intention of the appellants in retaining the money in order to have wrongful gain to themselves or causing wrongful loss to the complainant. Excepting the bald allegations that the appellants did not make payment to the second respondent and that the appellants utilised the amounts either by themselves or for some other work, there is no iota of allegation as to the dishonest intention in misappropriating the property. To make out a case of criminal breach of trust, it is not sufficient to show that money has been retained by the appellants. It must also be shown that the appellants dishonestly disposed of the same in some way or dishonestly retained the same. The mere fact that the appellants did not pay the money to the complainant does not amount to criminal breach of trust.” (Emphasis supplied) It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that it is a settled principle of law that to make out a case of criminal breach of trust, it is not sufficient to show that money has been retained by the appellants. It must also be shown that the appellants dishonestly disposed of the same in some way or dishonestly retained the same. It must also be shown that the appellants dishonestly disposed of the same in some way or dishonestly retained the same. The mere fact that the accused persons did not pay the money to the complainant does not amount to criminal breach of trust. 8. The learned counsel for the petitioners next relied upon the Judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Indian Oil Corporation Vs. NEPC India Ltd. reported in (2006) 6 SCC 736 and submits that any effort to settle civil dispute and claims, which does not involve any criminal offence, by applying pressure through criminal prosecution should be deprecated and discouraged. 9. It is next submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that there is absolutely no allegation against the petitioners of committing any forgery or insulting or criminally intimidating the informant or anyone else, in any manner. Hence, it is submitted that even if the allegations made in the F.I.R. are considered to be true, still the offences in respect of which this F.I.R. has been lodged; is not made out. Hence, it is submitted that the prayer as made in this criminal miscellaneous petition be allowed. 10. The learned Spl. P.P. submits that in view of the compromise, the State has no objection to the prayer for quashing the entire criminal proceeding. 11. Having heard the submissions made at the Bar and after going through the materials in the record, it is pertinent to mention here that there is no allegation against the petitioners of having committed dishonest misappropriation of the entrusted property nor there is any document in the record to show any entrustment nor the date, time and place of alleged entrustment has been mentioned anywhere in the First Information Report. Further, there is no allegation of any forgery having been committed by the petitioners nor there is any allegation against the petitioners of insulting anybody or criminally intimidating anybody. 12. Under such, circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that even if the allegations made in the F.I.R. are considered to be true in their entirety, still none of the offences for which the F.I.R. has been registered is made out. Hence, continuation of this criminal proceeding will amount to abuse of process of law. 12. Under such, circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that even if the allegations made in the F.I.R. are considered to be true in their entirety, still none of the offences for which the F.I.R. has been registered is made out. Hence, continuation of this criminal proceeding will amount to abuse of process of law. Therefore, this is a fit case where the F.I.R. of Sonari P.S. Case No. 156 of 2021 registered for the offence punishable under Section 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506 & 120B of the Indian Penal Code be quashed and set aside. 13. Accordingly the F.I.R. of Sonari P.S. Case No. 156 of 2021 registered for the offences punishable under Section 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506 & 120B of the Indian Penal Code is quashed and set aside. 14. In the result, this criminal miscellaneous petition is allowed. 15. The interim order granted earlier stands vacated.