V. SUJATHA
P. B. Srinivas – Appellant
Versus
State of A. P. – Respondent
ORDER :
V. Sujatha, J.
These two Criminal Petitions are filed seeking to quash C.C.No.390 of 2018 on the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Salur filed against the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 3 for the offences punishable under Section 420 of Indian Penal Code.
2. The petitioners in Crl.P.No.1097 of 2019 are arraigned as accused Nos.1 and 2; petitioner in Crl.P.No.4473 of 2019 was arraigned as accused No.3, in C.C.No.390 of 2018 on the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Salur. The respondent No.2 is the de-facto complainant. On 15.04.2017, the 2nd respondent herein has approached the Salur Town Police Station and reported that the accused Nos. 1 and 2 have committed fraud and cheated her by dealing with the properties situated in Sy.No.216-1B, 1C of Gumadam Village, Salur Mandal, Vizianagaram District which belong to her; that the accused Nos.1 and 2 have illegally, knowingly and with fraudulent intention executed registered sale deeds vide document bearing Nos.1460, 1461, 1462/2015, dated 27.06.2015 in favour of accused Nos.4 to 6. The 2nd respondent further submitted that the accused Nos.1 and 2 filed W.P.No.9817 of 2015 wherein they have stated that they are the
Vesa Holdings Private Limited & Another Vs. State of Kerala & Others
The court established that allegations of cheating must demonstrate fraudulent inducement, which was not present, allowing for the quashing of criminal proceedings.
The court established that civil disputes should not be cloaked as criminal offenses, emphasizing the need for clear evidence of criminal intent to sustain charges of cheating.
The court found that a civil dispute may constitute a criminal offence under S.420 IPC if fraudulent intent is present, and the mere existence of a civil remedy does not warrant quashing criminal pro....
The court established that civil disputes should not be cloaked as criminal offences, and quashing is warranted when no prima facie case exists.
The court can exercise its inherent jurisdiction under Sec. 482 Cr.P.C to quash criminal proceedings if they amount to an abuse of the process of the court or if quashing the proceedings would serve ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for allegations to constitute a cognizable offense and the application of the legal maxim 'Caveat Emptor' in property transactions.
Criminal liability can arise from civil disputes; allegations of fraud and conspiracy must be examined despite ongoing civil litigation.
Criminal intent in property transactions leads to proceedings under IPC, regardless of parallel civil suits.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.