SANDEEP N. BHATT
MEHUL CHINUBHAI CHOKSI – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT – Respondent
ORDER :
1. Present petition is filed with a prayer to quash and set aside impugned FIR being C.R. No. I-31 of 2017 registered with DCB Police Station, Ahmedabad, on 3.4.2017 for the offences punishable under Sections 406 , 420 and 34 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE . Present petitioners are accused Nos.2 and 4.
2. Brief facts of the case are that on 15.9.2013, the complainant and her husband had gone to M/s. Gitanjali Jewellers for making purchases and that in the bill given to them, M/s. Divyanirman Jewels, Shop No. 6, Isckon Centre, Shivranjani Crossroads, Satellite, Ahmedabad was written. It is alleged that the persons working in the said showroom informed them about diamond/gold monthly installment schemes and that one installment would be borne by the company. Upon the complainant finding the scheme to be good, the complainant and her husband discussed about investing Rs.5000/- per month in the gold coin scheme for 12 months. Thereupon, a person came to their residence and gave them “Tamanna” card and took Rs. 10,000/- (Rs.5,000/- x 2) towards two schemes. Thereafter, till 25.5.2014, a person used to come to the complainant's residence and take Rs.10,000 towards the installments. In Ju
Gold Quest International Private Limited v. State of Tamil Nadu and Others
HDFC Securities Limited and Others v. State of Maharashtra and Another
Indo Asian Limited v. State of Uttarakhand
Lavesh v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)
Mosiruddin Munshi v. Mohd. Siraj and Another
State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal
Directors of a company can be held accountable for criminal breach of trust and cheating if they are found to have participated in fraudulent schemes affecting customers.
Criminal proceedings ought not to be scuttled at the initial stage. Quashing of a complaint should rather be an exception and a rarity than an ordinary rule. Considering the allegations made in the c....
The ingredients of the offenses under Sections 405/406/420 IPC are prima facie present in the case, as there was evidence of entrustment of the jewelry, dishonest intention at the time of the transac....
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....
Point of law: Criminal cases involving offences which arise from commercial, financial, mercantile, partnership or similar transactions with an essentially civil flavour may in appropriate situations....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that allegations in a complaint should be accepted at face value at the pre-trial stage, and the trial court should have the opportunity to weigh t....
The Court held that the inherent power of the High Court under Section 482 CrPC can be exercised to quash a criminal proceeding if it is found that the proceeding is an abuse of the process of the Co....
Point of law : In the exercise of the power under Section 482 and while dealing with a plea that the dispute has been settled, the High Court must have due regard to the nature and gravity of the off....
A breach of contract does not constitute cheating unless fraudulent intent is proven at the outset of the agreement, as established in relevant legal precedents.
The court affirmed that criminal proceedings cannot be used as leverage in civil disputes, emphasizing the need for proof of dishonest intent and necessary ingredients for offences claimed. Lack of v....
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.