SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2010 Supreme(Pat) 2438

NAVIN SINHA
Vijay Sharma – Appellant
Versus
State Of Bihar – Respondent


Judgement Key Points

What is the legality of entrustment in criminal breach of trust when the agreement is to commit an offence? What is the applicability of Section 23 of the Indian Contract Act to illegal contracts in criminal proceedings? What is the effect of an illegal agreement on the maintainability of a criminal complaint for offences under IPC Section 406?

Key Points: - The agreement to procure illegal employment was void under Section 23 of the Indian Contract Act. [8000268040010] - There can be no entrustment of property for an illegal purpose, and entrustment for an illegal contract cannot sustain criminal breach of trust. [8000268040006] - The court quashed the proceedings, holding that the allegations were false, frivolous, and vexatious as a vendetta, and the entire case was not maintainable. [8000268040014]

What is the legality of entrustment in criminal breach of trust when the agreement is to commit an offence?

What is the applicability of Section 23 of the Indian Contract Act to illegal contracts in criminal proceedings?

What is the effect of an illegal agreement on the maintainability of a criminal complaint for offences under IPC Section 406?


JUDGEMENT

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, the State of Bihar and for the Opposite Party No. 2.

2. The petitioners are aggrieved by the order of cognizance dated 3.2.2004 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class at Jehanabad and their entire prosecution in Complaint Case No. 272 of 2002 under Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as the I.P.C.).

3. Opposite Party No. 2/complainant, in the complaint case stated that his son Kaushlendra Kumar @ Bablu was married to the sister of the petitioners in 1993. His son was unemployed. Petitioner No. 1 was employed in the Police Force at Jamshedpur. Petitioner No. 2 was his elder brother also employed in the Police Force. The complainant developed confidence in the petitioners due to the matrimonial relationship. Petitioner No. 1 offered to obtain employment for Kaushlendra Kumar in the Police Force if the complainant was willing to incur expenses. Since his son was unemployed, the complainant agreed to incur expenses. Petitioner No. 1 assured the complainant that recruitment was soon to be made in the Police Force at Jamshedpur and that he would influence the appointing officer by payment of money. Thi




























Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top