JUDGMENT : Heard the parties. 2. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with a prayer to set aside the entire criminal proceedings initiated against the petitioner in connection with Complaint Case No.3747 of 2024 including the order dated 18.05.2024, the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class- XXIII, Ranchi has found sufficient material to proceed with the case inter alia against the petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 420, 120B of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The allegation against the petitioner is that the father of the complainant purchased a property from Padmavati Devi which was subsequently sold by the son of Padmavati Devi namely Rajeshwer Nath Alok in favour of Sanjay Kumar Sharda @ Sanjay Kumar Sarda. The learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class- XXIII, Ranchi on the basis of the complaint, statement of the complainant on solemn affirmation and the statement of enquiry witnesses have found sufficient material in the record to proceed with the case against the petitioner;as already indicated above. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the judgment of this Court in the case of Biras Muni Kumar vs. The State of Jharkhand & Another reported in Cr.M.P. No.790 of 2023 dated 19.11.2024 and submits that in that case, this Court relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Mohammed Ibrahim & Others vs. State of Bihar &Another reported in (2009) 8 SCC 751 , para-19 of which reads as under:- “19. To constitute an offence under Section 420, there should not only be cheating, but as a consequence of such cheating, the accused should have dishonestly induced the person deceived (i) to deliver any property to any person, or (ii) to make, alter or destroy wholly or in part a valuable security (or anything signed or sealed and which is capable of being converted into a valuable security).” in which the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has dealt with the ingredients of Section 420 and submits that there is absolutely no allegation against the petitioner of making the complainant deliver any property to the petitioner. 5. 5. It is then submitted that at best, on the basis of the allegations, the petitioner might have claimed that he has been cheated as the vendor has taken money from him without having title of the ownership of the property but by no stretch of imagination, it can be said that the petitioner has cheated the complainant. Hence, it is submitted that even after the entire allegations made against the petitioner are considered to be true in their entirety, still no offence punishable under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code is made out against the petitioner even with the aid of Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code, more so because the vendor of the petitioner claims that he is bonafide owner of the property sold by him to the petitioner and at best a civil dispute can be made out, therefore, the prosecution of the petitioner is for the purpose of wrecking vengeance by giving a cloak of criminal offence to a purely civil dispute. Hence, it is submitted that this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition be allowed. 6. Learned Addl.P.P. appearing for the State and the learned counsel for the opposite party No.2 on the other hand vehemently oppose the prayer of the petitioner and submits that as the property of the complainant has been delivered by the co-accused to the petitioner, hence, the offence punishable under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code is made out against the petitioner. Hence, it is submitted that this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition, being without any merit, be dismissed. 7. Having heard the rival submissions made at the Bar and after carefully going through the materials available in the record, it is pertinent to mention here that as already indicated above in the foregoing paragraph of this judgment; one of the essential ingredients to constitute the offence punishable under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code is:- “There has to be delivery of any property to any person cheated.” Now in this case, the complainant claims to have been cheated but he has not delivered any property to the petitioner. There is no allegation against the petitioner of inducing the complainant in any manner nor even there is any allegation that the vendor of the petitioner in any manner, induced the complainant, dishonestly or otherwise. 8. There is no allegation against the petitioner of inducing the complainant in any manner nor even there is any allegation that the vendor of the petitioner in any manner, induced the complainant, dishonestly or otherwise. 8. Under such circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that even if the entire allegations made in the complaint, statement of the complainant on solemn affirmation and the statement of enquiry witnesses are considered to be true in their entirety, still the offence punishable under Section 420, 120B of the Indian Penal Code is not made out against the petitioner and the continuation of the entire criminal proceeding will amount to abuse of process of law. Therefore, this is a fit case where the entire criminal proceedings including the order dated 18.05.2024 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class- XXIII, Ranchi in connection with Complaint Case No.3747 of 2024 be quashed and set aside. 9. Accordingly, the entire criminal proceedings including the order dated 18.05.2024 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class- XXIII, Ranchi in connection with Complaint Case No.3747 of 2024 is quashed and set aside. 10. In the result, this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is allowed.