Point of Law: Section 415 of IPC mandates that accused should have lured victim to part with some property with dishonest intention right from beginning of transaction.

ORDER :

1. The petitioners are before this Court calling in question registration of crime in Crime No.154 of 2021 registered on 05-10-2021 for offences punishable under Sections 420, 448, 506 and 34 of the IPC.

2. Shorn of unnecessary details, facts in brief, are as follows:-

The 2nd respondent is the complainant and a partner with the 1st petitioner. Petitioners 2 and 3 are roped in for the reason that certain work execution that the 1st petitioner and the complainant sought to undertake was on the site belonging to petitioners 2 and 3. The 1st petitioner and the complainant entered into a deed of partnership at Hyderabad on 26-02-2020. The deed of partnership was for execution of certain works. Remuneration and inflow of capital, inter alia was a part of the partnership deed. After execution of the partnership deed, the 1st petitioner, the 3rd petitioner and the complainant entered into another agreement for execution of work titled as agreement of work execution. The salary fixed under the contract, for execution of work was Rs.2/- lakhs. It appears that the complainant trespassed into the house of the 2nd petitioner who was a senior citizen, which leads the 2nd petitioner to register a crime against the complainant on 26-05-2021. The police on recording the statements of the 2nd petitioner and the complainant submitted a non-cognizable report. When things stood thus, a legal notice is caused by the complainant claiming certain amounts from the hands of petitioners 1 and 3. This is replied to by the recipients of the notice and carrying on further, the complainant seeks to register a crime in Mysore City in Crime No.154 of 2021 narrating incidents between 26-02-2020 and 13-09-2021 for offences punishable under Sections 420, 448, 506 and 34 of the IPC. The police issued notices to the petitioners under Section 41(A) of the Cr.P.C., It is then the petitioners knocked at the doors of this Court in the subject petition.

3. This Court entertaining the petition has stayed all further investigation ON 07-12-2021, the moment notices were issued under Section 41(A) of the Cr.P.C., The interim order is in subsistence even as on date. Therefore, not a speck of investigation has taken place in the case at hand.

4. Heard Sri Sandesh J.Chouta, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners, Sri Mahesh Shetty, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 and the 2nd respondent who appeared in person.

5. The learned senior counsel would contend with vehemence that the 2nd respondent/complainant first enters into a partnership deed, and next enters into an agreement of work execution and when he found that his terms were not being acceded to by the petitioners, causes a legal notice claiming a particular amount. When the legal notice did not heed any desired results, he registers the crime at Mysore contending that he is a resident of Mysore, for breach of agreement/contract. He would contend that the criminal law is misused seeking recovery of certain amount alleging breach of contract. He would further contend that breach of contract cannot lead to registration of a crime. He seeks to place reliance upon plethora of judgments, necessary of which, will bear consideration, in the course of the order.

6. Per contra, the 2nd respondent in person seeks to vehemently refute the submissions to contend that believing the words of the petitioners, he has undertaken the risk of execution of certain works and he had been hoodwinked. But for the assurance given by the 1st petitioner that he would part with 40% of the apartment that would be built and sold, he would not have ventured in relationship with the petitioners. He would contend that the 1st petitioner and the 3rd petitioner had orally agreed to give 40% of the share. Therefore, he is entitled to receive huge sums of money. He would contend that, this clearly amounts to cheating under Section 420 of the IPC and when the complainant asked for money, they have threatened him