Back
Andhra Pradesh High Court
Yada Anjaneyulu - Appellant
Versus
State OF A.P. - RESPONDENT
Decided On: 12-30-99
The legal principle established is that the offence of cheating would not elude from a commercial transaction, as per the Supreme Court's observation and Section 415 of the Indian Penal Code.
Headnote:
Cheating - Criminal Liability for Commercial Transaction - The court dismissed the petition to quash the First Information Report based on the Supreme Court's observation that the offence of cheating would not elude from a commercial transaction, citing Section 415 of the Indian Penal Code.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner and another person approached a finance company for a loan, which was granted but never repaid. The company lodged a complaint alleging an offence under Section 420 read with Section 107, IPC and Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act.
Finding of the Court:
The court dismissed the petition, stating that the transaction, despite being commercial in nature, did not elude from the offence of cheating as per the Supreme Court's observation.
Issues: Whether the transaction, though commercial, would elude from the offence of cheating under the Indian Penal Code.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the Supreme Court's observation that the offence of cheating would not elude from a commercial transaction, citing Section 415 of the Indian Penal Code.
Final Decision: The criminal petition to quash the First Information Report was dismissed by the court.
( 1 ) THE petitioner is the second accused in crime No. 86 of 1999 on the file of the Sircilia police Station, Karimnagar District. The second respondent herein, which is a finance Company lodged a complaint with the police stating that the petitioner along with another person approached the second respondent for a loan of Rs. 1,50,000/ -. Accordingly the loan was granted. There after the money was never paid. In fact the first accused, it appears, issued a cheque towards repayment of loan amount which was dishonoured on account of non- availability of funds in the account of the accused. In the circumstances the complaint was lodged alleging that the petitioner and the other accused committed an offence under Section 420 read with Section 107, IPC and Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments act. The present petition is filed under section 482, Cr. P. C. to quash the First information Report in the above crime.
( 2 ) THE learned Counsel for the petitioner argued that the transaction is purely a civil in nature but the proceedings under criminal law are not called for. On the other hand, the learned Counsel for the respondent relied upon a decision of the Supreme Court reported in Rajesh Bajaj vs. State NCT of Delhi wherein the Supreme Court observed as follows:"it may be that the facts narrated in the present complaint would as well reveal a commercial transaction or money transaction. But that is hardly a reason for holding that the offence of cheating would elude from such a transaction. In fact many a cheatings were committed in the course of commercial and also money transactions. One of the illustrations set out u/s 415, IPC is worthy of notice now: (f) A intentionally deceives Z into abelief that A means to repay any money that Z may lend to him and thereby dishonestly induces Z to lead him money, A not intending to repay it. A cheats. "
( 3 ) IN the circumstances of the case and in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court, i see no merit in the petition. Criminal petition is accordingly dismissed.
