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

2022 Supreme(Pat) 539

PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Krishna Yadav – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Mr. Ranjit Kumar.
For the Opp. Parties : M/s Shyam Kumar Singh, Lal Bahadur Singh.

Judgement Key Points

What is the scope of cognizance under IPC Sections 417, 420, and 120B when the complaint shows civil dispute and no deceptive misrepresentation by the accused? What are the criteria to hold that there is cheating and conspiracy under IPC in a land sale transaction where the complainant is not the purchaser and no alleged false representation is shown? What is the Court’s ruling on quashing cognizance when the allegations do not establish the essential elements of Sections 417, 420, and 120B IPC?

Key Points: - (!) - (!) - (!)

What is the scope of cognizance under IPC Sections 417, 420, and 120B when the complaint shows civil dispute and no deceptive misrepresentation by the accused?

What are the criteria to hold that there is cheating and conspiracy under IPC in a land sale transaction where the complainant is not the purchaser and no alleged false representation is shown?

What is the Court’s ruling on quashing cognizance when the allegations do not establish the essential elements of Sections 417, 420, and 120B IPC?


PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH, J.:–This is an application for quashing the order dated 27.02.2018 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate – II, Aurangabad (hereinafter referred to as the “Magistrate”) in Complaint Case No. 583 of 2017 whereby and whereunder cognizance has been taken against petitioners under Section 417, 420, 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as the “I.P.C.”)

2. The complaint case, in brief, is that petitioner no. 2 Suraj Singh, who is gotiya of the complainant, got registered fraudulently sale-deed in the name of Dharmendra Yadav (petitioner no. 5) and other co-accused persons are witness to the sale-deed and thereby committed offence under Sections 417, 420 and 120(B) of the I.P.C. The learned Magistrate, after carefully perusing the complaint petition, has arrived at a prima facie conclusion against the accused persons (petitioners herein) that the offence under Sections 417, 420 and 120(B) of the I.P.C. is made out.

3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the present case is purely a civil dispute between the parties. Complainant and petitioners are gotiyas. For the same piece of land, the complainant has earlier filed a t

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