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

2024 Supreme(Cal) 157

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
SHAMPA DUTT (PAUL), J.
Mr. Debapratim Neogie – Appellant
Versus
The State of West Bengal & Anr. – Respondents
CRR 1376 of 2019
Decided on : 01-04-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Karan Dudhwewala, Mr. Soumalya Ganguly.
For the Respondent: Mr. Md. Anwar Hossain, Ms. Sreyashee Biswas, Mr. Sandipan Ganguly, Mr. Sourav Chatterjee, Ms. Manasrita Mukherjee, Mr. Amitava Das, Mr. Deb Kumar Sen.

The distinction between civil disputes and criminal offences is vital; mere breach of contract does not constitute criminal cheating without evidence of fraudulent intent.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 406 and 420 - Quashing of charge sheet - Allegations of cheating and criminal breach of trust made by complainant regarding lease agreement for premises and supply of electricity - Court finds absence of fraudulent or dishonest intention necessary to support charges - Emphasized distinction between civil disputes and those constituting criminal offences, indicating that continuation amounts to abuse of process - Proceedings quashed. (Paras 1-39)

(B) Legal responsibility of company versus individual directors - Court references Supreme Court precedents confirming that individual liability arises only when company is named as accused and sufficient evidence of direct involvement exists - Leading to procedural dismissal of charges against the appellant. (Paras 19-26)

Facts of the case:
The complainant alleged fraudulent misrepresentation and failure to provide electricity as promised by the directors of the defendant company, resulting in substantial financial losses to the complainant. Payments over time amounted to over two crores, and subsequent disconnection of power supply caused business disruptions. Notice was sent prior to the complaint, underscoring the lack of resolution and the growing financial burden. (Paras 2-18)

Findings of Court:
The court noted that allegations lacked demonstrable fraudulent intent, which is a necessary component for the offences of cheating or criminal breach of trust under Sections 406 and 420. Moreover, the issues originated primarily from a contractual dispute, better suited for civil resolution rather than criminal prosecution. (Paras 30-36)

Issues: Whether the allegations of fraud and breach of trust constituted actionable criminal offences or were merely civil matters arising from a contractual disagreement. (Para 8)

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that mere breach of contract cannot translate to criminal liability absent of clear evidence of dishonest intention from the outset of the transaction. Additionally, allowing criminal charges where none are legally substantiated misuse the judicial process, justifying quashing the FIR. (Paras 38-40)

Result: Proceeding in Durgapur Police Station Case No. 425 of 2018 quashed. No order as to costs.

Table of Content
1. establishment of business relationship. (Para 1 , 2)
2. contents of sub-lease agreement. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10)
3. electricity supply issues and complaints. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17)
4. inducement and intention in complaint. (Para 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22)
5. legal implications of dishonesty and fraud. (Para 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29)
6. distinction between civil and criminal matters. (Para 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34)
7. rationale for quashing proceedings. (Para 35 , 36 , 37)
8. conclusion and directive of the court. (Para 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43)

JUDGMENT :

Shampa Dutt (Paul), J.

1. The present revision has been preferred praying for quashing of Charge Sheet filed in Durgapur Police Station Case No. 425 of 2018 under Sections 420 and 406 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860 pending before the Court of the Learned 3rd Chief Judicial Magistrate at Durgapur, Paschim Bardhaman.

2. The allegations made by the Opposite Party No. 2 in the Written Complaint are as follows:-

    i) ‘We, M/s Reliance Corporate IT Park Limited, are having our Regd. Office at Reliance Corporate Park Building No. 4, 5, TTC Industrial Area, Thane–Belapur Road, Ghansoli, Navi Mumbai – 400701 and local Office at a Neogie Auto Mansion, South NH2 City Centre Phaze II Durgapur District–Burdwan presently Paschim Burdwan, Circle office now at 17 & 18th Floor, Tower No.–2, Godrej Waterside, Plot No. 5, Block DP, Sector – V, Salt Lake City, Kolkata – 700 091, formerly at Eco Space Business Park, 4th Floor, Block 3B, Rajarhat, New Town, Kolkata–700 015.

    ii) We were looking for a suitable accommodation for our office and commercial purpose. In course of our search, we came in contact with above named Mr. Debapratim Neogie, Mr. Debabrata Neogie and Mr. Subrata Neogie, all Directors of ‘Neogie Auto (P) Ltd’., and persons-in-charge, control and responsible for day to day affairs of their company ?Neogie Auto (P) Ltd., who represented that their company is having sufficient space to let out and offered us to take their premises for our office purpose.

    iii) On expressing our requirements that we need round the clock supply of electricity, the above named persons assured to give us round the clock electric supply up to 60KV from their transformer already installed at the premises. We having expressed that we need additional power of 37KV of electricity Power over and above 60KV to run our office, the above named persons agreed and assured to increase the load as required by us.

    iv) Believing in good faith in their representation and assurances, we agreed to enter into long term Sub-Lease agreement at their premises.

    v) Accordingly a registered sub lease deed dated 21st April, 2015 was executed by and between the above named company and ourselves. In terms of sub-lease, the above named ‘Noegie Auto (P) Ltd.’, as Lessor granted lease in our favour in respect of 5000 sqt. little more or less area situated at Ground Floor and 1st floor comprised in Holding No. N/19, NH-2 South, Touzi No. 01 Mouza–Faridpur City Centre Durgapur – 16 J.L. No. 74 C.S. Plot No. 3395 (P) NH-2, Khatian No. 1362, L.O.P. No. 1 Ward No. 22 within Durgapur Municipal Corporation under the jurisdiction of the Office of the Additional District Sub-Registrar Durgapur District–Burdwan, Durgapur-713216 (W.B.) on the terms and conditions mentioned in the said Sub-Lease.

    vi) Thereafter, agreement dated 09.04.2016 executed between said “Neogie Auto (P) Ltd.”, and ourselves, the above named persons agreed to provide us additional 37KV of electricity Power over and above 60KV to run our office.

    vii) At the time of making such sub-lease Deed and subsequent agreement, the above named persons have promised and assured that there would be no impediment from any corner, what so ever it may be, for smooth running of our business. Amongst others, it was also assured that there would be uninterrupted supply of electricity.

    viii) Believing upon their promises and assurances, we parted with an onet

            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 Back to top