IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
SHAMPA DUTT (PAUL), J.
Sheikh Hasnabul Haque & Anr. – Appellants
Versus
The State of West Bengal & Anr. – Respondents
CRR 1777 of 2020
Decided on : 25-04-2024
Cheating - Business Transaction - Sections 420/419/506/120B of IPC - Summary
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners, directors of a company, were accused of not paying outstanding dues from a business transaction. The complainant alleged cheating and filed a petition under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the dispute was civil in nature, arising from a continuing business transaction, and lacked the essential ingredients to constitute the alleged offences. The court quashed the proceedings in the interest of justice.
Issues: Prima facie existence of criminal offences, abuse of process of the court, and nature of the dispute as civil or criminal.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that criminal proceedings should not be used to scuttle legitimate prosecutions and cautioned against criminalizing civil disputes. It also highlighted the need for fraudulent inducement and mens rea to establish cheating.
Final Decision: The court allowed the petition, quashed the proceedings, and disposed of all connected applications.
JUDGMENT :
Shampa Dutt (Paul), J.
1. The present revision has been preferred praying for quashing of the proceedings being G.R. Case No. 579 of 2020 arising out of Lake Town P.S. Case No. 138/2020 dated 06.09.2020 under Sections 420/419/506/120B of the Indian Penal Code now pending in the court of the Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bidhannagar.
2. The petitioners are both directors of a company namely M/s Dynamic Hatcheries Private Limited having its office at 36, Beck Bagan Road, Kolkata – 700 017, PS- Karaya.
3. The complainant, one Girwar Bajaj, lodged a written complaint on 08.03.2020 with the Officer-in-Charge Lake Town PS and subsequently another written complaint with the Commissioner of Police at Bidhannagar Police Commissionerate on 11.03.2020 making certain allegations against the petitioner. On 07.08.2020, the said complainant filed a petition u/s 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 being MP Case No. 45/2020 before the Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bidhannagar praying for a direction to the I/C of Lake Town PS to treat the petition as an FIR and conduct investigation into the matter. However, instead of passing such order of directing the registration of an FIR, the Ld. ACJM was pleased to call for a preliminary enquiry report from the Officer-in-Charge, Lake Town PS as to the alleged facts and to find out whether any cognizable offence was disclosed or not. Further, one Pradip Saha, SI of Police, Lake Town PS conducted such enquiry and submitted a report before the Ld. ACJM, Bidhannagar on 29.09.2020 stating that the aforementioned case, i.e., Lake Town PS Case No. 138/2020 dated 06.09.2020 has been registered in relation to the said matter and the case is under investigation.
4. The allegations in the written complaint are as follows:-
ii) During the said business period Maize and Soya D.O.C. was supplied by the said company of the Complainant to the above said accused company on the condition that said accused will pay the amount after 30 days from the date of supplying of Maize and Soya D.O.C. In the year 2016-2017 the Complainant had supplied the goods of an amount of Rs. 51442226/- and in this respect the Complainant had received an amount Rs. 39822003/- out of said Rs. 51442226/- from the said accused and as such Rs. 11620223/- standing due in the year of 2016-2017 upon the said accused.
iii) In the year of 2017-2018 the Complainant has supplied the goods for an amount of Rs. 108883197/- and in this respect the Complainant had received an amount of Rs. 94418990/- and as such Rs. 14464207/- standing due in the year of 2017-2018 upon the said accused person.
iv) In the year of 2016-2017 the standing due amount of Rs. 11620223/- and in the year of 2017-2018 the standing due amount of Rs. 14464207/- upon the said accused person. So, till the year of 2017-2018 the standing due amount of Rs. 26084430/- i.e. (Rs. 11620223/- + 14464207/-) upon the said accused person.
v) Thereafter again in the year of 2018-2019 the Complainant had supplied the goods till 19.03.2019 for the amount of Rs. 63628565/- and up to 11/06/2019 the Complainant had received an amount of RS. 59282270/- and as such Rs. 4346295/- standing due in the year of 2018-2019 upon the said accused person.
5. That the total out dues from 2016 to 2019 is Rs. 11620223 + Rs. 14464207 + Rs. 4346295 = Total Rs. 30431015.
6. In spite of several requests the petitioners/accuseds have failed to pay the said outstanding dues.
7. The petitioners’ further state that on receiving the complaint dated 11.03.2020, the Commissioner of Police, Bidhannagar Police Commissionerate has forwarded the same to Commissioner of Police, Kolkata, who in turn sent i
Central Bureau of Investigation v. Duncans Agro Industries Ltd.
G. Sagar Suri vs. State of UP [2000 (2) SCC 636]
Hridaya Ranjan Prasad Verma v. State of Bihar [2000 (4) SCC 168]
Indian Oil Corpn. v. NEPC India Ltd. and Others (2006) 6 SCC 736
Medchl Chemicals & Pharma (P) Ltd. v. Biological E. Ltd. [2000 (3) SCC 269]
M. Krishnan vs Vijay Kumar [2001 (8) SCC 645]
Madhavrao Jiwaji Rao Scindia v. Sambhajirao Chandrojirao Angre [1988 (1) SCC 692]
Rajiv Thapar v. Madan Lal Kapoor [(2013) 3 SCC 330 : (2013) 3 SCC (Cri) 158
Vijay Kumar Ghai & Ors. vs State of West Bengal & Ors., (2022) 7 SCC 124, decided on March 22
V.P. Shrivastava vs Indian Explosives Limited & Ors., (2010) 10 SCC 361, decided on September 24
Rupan Deol Bajaj vs. Kanwar Pal Singh Gill [1995 (6) SCC 194]
Rajesh Bajaj v. State NCT of Delhi
State of Bihar vs. Rajendra Agrawalla [1996 (8) SCC 164]
Zandu Phamaceutical Works Ltd. v. Mohd. Sharaful Haque [2005 (1) SCC 122]
Criminal proceedings should not be used to scuttle legitimate prosecutions and cautioned against criminalizing civil disputes.
The ingredients of the offence under Section 420 IPC must be satisfied for a criminal prosecution to be maintainable, even if a civil dispute exists between the parties. The pendency of a case under ....
Criminal proceedings cannot be initiated for civil disputes; a prima facie case must exist to avoid abuse of legal processes.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for a prima facie case to be established in criminal proceedings, and the court's authority to quash proceedings if the allegations....
Mere non-payment in business supply transaction does not constitute cheating under IPC Section 420 absent proof of dishonest inducement at inception; such civil disputes warrant FIR quashing to preve....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.