# Smt. Shalini Bhateja & Anr. vs. The State of U.P. & Ors.

> SC judgment dated 2026-01-06. Citation: TCN-2026-SC-00088. The petitioners, accused in FIR No. 396 of 2025, sought to quash the FIR before the High Court,…

- **Court:** SC
- **Order date:** 6 Jan 2026
- **Citation:** TCN-2026-SC-00088
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/supreme-court-of-india/smt-shalini-bhateja-anr-vs-the-state-of-up-ors-ycnwb

## Summary

### Background

The petitioners, accused in FIR No. 396 of 2025, sought to quash the FIR before the High Court, which was declined. They contended mala fide intent in registering the FIR, which the High Court rejected. The High Court directed them to appear before the Trial Court within 60 days to apply for bail. The dispute involves allegations of cheating related to a refund, with the 3rd respondent representing a corporate entity now before NCLT, where an IRP has been appointed. Multiple FIRs and related proceedings were initiated on similar facts, some of which have been stayed or withdrawn.

## Facts

Petitioners are accused in FIR No. 396 of 2025, dated 09.06.2025, registered at Police Station Tajganj, District Agra.

Petitioners sought to quash the FIR before the High Court, which was declined by the impugned judgment.

The High Court rejected the petitioners' contention of mala fide intention to cause purposeful harassment in registering the FIR.

The High Court directed petitioners to appear before the Trial Court within 60 days and granted liberty to apply for regular/anticipatory bail.

Shri Ashish Pandey, learned Counsel for the petitioners, argued that the dispute is civil in nature and there is no cause for a criminal complaint.

Petitioners' counsel also argued that there are three different cases filed before various courts on the very same set of facts.

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the High Court was correct in declining to quash FIR No. 396 of 2025, despite contentions …

**Ratio:** The Supreme Court did not explicitly overturn the High Court's decision to decline

…

**Reasoning:** The Court noted that a chargesheet had been filed in FIR No. 396/2025, and the

…

**Interpretation:** While the High Court's decision to not quash the FIR stands, the Supreme

…

**Application:** The Court applied its discretion to ensure that petitioners are not taken into

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** K. VINOD CH…; Ahsanuddin…
- **Appellants:** Shalini B…; Interim Resolution…
- **Respondents:** corporate…; The State o…
- **Other parties:** former Officials/D…
- **Advocates:** Ashish P…; Ardhendumauli…

## Timeline

- **2023 — CC No.1971/20…**: Nikhil Garg filed application u/s 156(3)…
- **2024-09-13 — JMFC-04…**: Ld. JMFC-04, Karkardooma, directed registration of FIR against Rajiv Kumar s/o Jagdish…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 156(3) — Delivery of property and documents to…](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-156)

---

This is a preview. The full structured summary, issues, precedents and source judgment are available on CaseEase - Legal Intelligence Simplified: https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/supreme-court-of-india/smt-shalini-bhateja-anr-vs-the-state-of-up-ors-ycnwb