Back
M. NAGAPRASANNA
Patel Engineering Limited – Appellant
Versus
State Of Karnataka – Respondent
ORDER :
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA)
The petitioners/accused 1 to 6 are before this Court calling in question a crime in Crime No.422 of 2024 registered for offences punishable under Sections 406 , 420 and 506(2) of the IPC pending before the II Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division) and JMFC, Anekal, Bengaluru.
2. Facts, in brief, germane are as follows:-
1st petitioner/Patel Engineering Company (‘the Company’ for short) is a Company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 2013 and is said to be engaged in construction of dams, bridges, tunnels, roads, piling works, industrial structures, real estate and is said to be a public limited company in the Bombay Stock Exchange and the National Stock Exchange. The 2nd respondent is the complainant. The Company and the 2nd petitioner/the Chairman and Managing Director of the Company who is now said to be no more, owned certain properties measuring about 103 acres in various survey numbers in Hulimangala, Thirupalya and Maragondanahalli, Jigani Hobli, Anekal Taluk, Bengaluru (‘the aggregate property’) and desirous of developing into an integrated township on the property had applied to the State Government see
Breaches of commercial agreements do not constitute criminal offenses unless fraudulent intent is established at the outset, reinforcing that civil disputes should not be converted into criminal matt....
Criminal prosecution cannot be resorted to for settling civil disputes. Such an exercise is nothing but abuse of process of law which must be discouraged in its entirety.
Civil disputes should not be framed as criminal offences when no fraudulent intent is evident, as it constitutes an abuse of legal processes.
A mere commercial dispute, characterized by lack of initial dishonest intention, cannot constitute criminal offenses of cheating or breach of trust.
Point of Law : Agreement was terminated by the complainant himself and the dispute before the Arbitrator was sought by the complainant himself. Therefore, there can be no question of an intention to ....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
