IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CIRCUIT BENCH AT JALPAIGURI
TIRTHANKAR GHOSH, J.
Ram Charan Bansal Construction Pvt. Ltd & Ors. - Appellant
Versus
The State of West Bengal & Anr. - Respondents
C.R.R. 292 of 2024
Decided on : 08-01-2025
JUDGMENT :
Tirthankar Ghosh, J.
1. The present revisional application has been preferred challenging the proceeding arising out of a complaint case being CR Case No. 333 of 2017 under Section 420 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code pending before the Learned Judicial Magistrate 3rd Court Siliguri.
2. The allegations made in the petition of complaint were to the effect that as follows:
That in pursuance of accused person's order the complainant company supplied 11 nos of 630 mm PN 4 PE 80 HDPE Pipe (6 Mtr. Long) amounting to Rs. 4,75, 200.00 to the accused persons vide tax invoice no UPPLT/029/16-17 and Challan No. 029/16-17 dated 06.12.2016 upon receipt of Rs. 1,50,000/- as advance and the accused persons assured the complainant to pay the balance amount of Rs. 3,25,000/- (Approx) to and in favour of the complainant company upon receipt of goods by the accused persons.
That considering the relationship between the complainant and the accused persons the complainant supplied the above materials as per the demand of the accused persons and the said materials duly received by the accused persons.
That subsequently the accused persons intentionally avoided and neglected to pay the complainant company the said balance amount of Rs.3,25,000/- (Approx) despite several request and reminders vide letters dated 22.12.2016, 16.01.2017, 16.02.2017 & 06.04.2017 were made by the complainant company to the accused persons.
It is not out of place to mention herein that against the above referred letters of the complainant company the accused persons denied to make payment to the complainant company on false, incorrect, vague and baseless allegation though it was admitted by the accused persons regarding receipt of the above materials by them.
That it is stated herein that inspite of correspondence the accused persons are ignoring the payment of dues to the complainant company, though the accused persons are willful and deliberate failure, refusal and neglect to make payment of the said amount of Rs. 3,25,000/- (Approx) to the complainant, the accused persons have dishonestly altered and destroyed the amount for their personal gain, that the said amount was a valuable security, which the accused persons has fraudulently, intentionally and dishonestly converted into a valuable security in the accused persons name.
That the accused persons said act of malicious, motivated, willful and fraudulent act/s clearly and manifestly proves the fact that the accused persons have fraudulent & dishonest intention of cheating.
That due to non-payment of aforesaid outstanding sum of Rs. 3,25,000/- (Approx) to the complainant has been computing huge financial loss and mental agony.
That the complainant upon good faith and upon the accused persons request, representations, and assurances that the accused persons would pay to the complainant the balance amount of goods supplied to them as afore stated.
That despite the complainant regular follow-ups and inspite of the complainant's repeated requests, reminders, and demands and sufficient opportunities granted to the accused persons, the accused persons had willfully and deliberately failed, refused and neglected to make payment of the outstanding dues of Rs.3,25,000/- (Approx).
That the accused persons have miserably failed neglected and refused to make payment of the said outstanding dues of the complainant amounting to Rs.3,25,000/- (Approx).
That the accused persons therefore committed the offence of criminal conspiracy and cheating with the ulterior motive of defrauding the complainant and causing wrongful loss to the complainant in every aspect.
That the accused persons have therefore cheated the complainant by fraudulently and dishonestly inducing the complainant to supply goods as above by the accused persons and intentionally induced the c
Anil Mahajan –vs- Bhor Industries Ltd. & Anr. Reported in (2005) 10 SCC 228;
Deepak Gaba & Ors.-vs.- State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.
V.Y. Jose –Vs. – State of Gujarat
All Cargo Movers India (P) Ltd. –Vs. – Dhanesh Badarmal Jain
A mere breach of contract does not constitute an offence under Section 420 IPC unless fraudulent intention is established at the time of the promise.
The court held that mere non-payment of dues in a commercial transaction does not constitute criminal offences under IPC Sections 406 and 420, emphasizing the distinction between civil and criminal l....
No offence under Sections 406/420 IPC without deception at transaction inception or entrustment with dishonest misappropriation; business account disputes civil, not criminal; proceedings quashed und....
Breach of contract via delayed sub-standard supply not offences under Sections 406/420 IPC without initial deception or property entrustment.
Disputes arising from financial transactions, lacking evidence of fraudulent intent, cannot suffice for charges of cheating or criminal breach of trust.
Mere non-payment for goods in a civil transaction cannot constitute cheating or criminal breach of trust under IPC; intent must be proven.
The court affirmed that a party only involved in a civil contract cannot face criminal liability unless it directly transacted or misappropriated funds, supporting the need for a clear distinction be....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a dispute primarily civil in nature, such as non-payment under a contractual liability, does not necessarily constitute an offence under Secti....
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.