Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
PURNENDU SINGH
Kaushalya Devi wife of Late Kari Chaudhary – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
PURNENDU SINGH, J
1. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners; learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned APP for the State.
2. The present application has been filed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. for quashing of the order taking cognizance dated 18.12.2015 in connection with Saur Bazar P.S. Case No.60 of 2015, whereby cognizance has been taken by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Saharsa under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. It is alleged by the informant/complainant that she negotiated with the petitioner No. 1 for the purchase of 01 katha of land and for that she paid a sum of Rupees 80,000/- to the petitioner No. 3 and a jarbaiynanama (Agreement for sale) was prepared, and it was agreed that after getting the rest Rupees 10,000/- she will execute the sale deed in her favour. However it has been alleged that even after repeated request and pleader's notice the petitioners allegedly refused to execute the sale deed. She further alleged that the khata of the land in question has been opened in the name of the Government of Bihar, thereafter a Panchayat was also convened but the petitioners allegedly refused to obey the
Sections 406 and 420 of the IPC cannot co-exist in the same transaction; criminal breach of trust and cheating are distinct offences requiring different elements of fraud.
The court clarified that allegations solely involving civil transactions cannot form the basis for criminal charges under IPC Sections 406 and 420 without evidence of fraudulent intent.
Criminal proceedings should not be initiated for disputes that are fundamentally civil in nature, and the essential ingredients of the alleged offenses must be clearly established for prosecution und....
Fraudulent intent at the inception of a transaction is essential to establish cheating; mere breach of contract does not constitute a criminal offence.
Offence of cheating - Quash of criminal complaint - There is no fraudulent or dishonest inducement of a person induced to deliver any property to any person again same is not the case her – Court not....
Point of law : exercise powers under Section 482 CrPC, the complaint in its entirety shall have to be examined on the basis of the allegation made in the complaint/FIR/charge-sheet and the High Court....
The court held that mere breach of contract does not constitute a criminal offence of cheating or criminal breach of trust, emphasizing the necessity of fraudulent intent from inception.
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
