IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH, KOHIMA BENCH
KARDAK ETE, J.
Engineering Projects(India) Limited & Ors. - Petitioners
Versus
The State of Nagaland & Ors. - Respondents
Crl. Pet. No. 4 of 2019
Decided On : 29-04-2023
Indian Penal Code,1860 - Sections 405, 406, 409, 415 and 420 IPC read with 34/120B - Criminal Procedure Code,1973 - Section 482, 190 and 200 - Offence of Criminal Breach of trust – Cheating – Criminal Conspiracy – Charged - Petitioner No. 1, Engineering Projects (India) Limited is a company, Government of India Enterprise and petitioner Nos. 2 to 6 are employees in company functioning in different capacities. Pending present petition, petitioner No. 2 & 3 died, Respondent 2 has been striked off by the order dated - Petitioners have approached this Court jointly as reliefs sought for are common and identical in nature - Case of petitioners is that a complaint petition was filed by M/S J.A. Brothers, represented by its proprietor before Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, against petitioners alleging inter-alia, commission of offences - Whether necessary ingredients of offences punishable under are prima facie made out, whether encashment of 4 Bank Guarantees amounts to mere breach of contract or constitutes an offence of criminal breach of trust or cheating, And whether dispute is one of purely civil nature and liable to be set aside – Held, On perusal of above law laid down by Hon’ble Apex Court and applying it on present case, it can be concluded that present case warrants intervention of this Court by exercising powers, Court find that there has been attempt to stretch contours of civil dispute and essentially impart a criminal colour to it - Hon’ble Supreme Court has number of times expressed its disapproval for applying criminal colour to civil dispute, which has been made merely to take advantage of relatively quick relief granted in contents of civil dispute which is nothing but an abuse of process of law which must be discouraged in its entirety - In view of above discussions on facts and circumstances of present case and law as laid down by Hon’ble Apex Court, Court of considered view that complaint case being CR. Case No pending before learned Court of CJM and order dated taking cognisance of offences - Criminal Petition No. 4/2019 is accordingly allowed.
JUDGMENT :
Heard Mr. A. Bora, learned Senior counsel for the petitioners assisted by Mr. V. Chowdhury, learned counsel, Mr. P. Goswami, learned counsel and Mr. Pfosekho Pfotte, learned counsel. Also heard Mr. P. Chowdhury, learned counsel for respondent No. 2 and Mr. K. Angami, learned PP for the State of Nagaland.
2. This criminal petition under section 482 of Cr.PC, 1973 has been filed by the petitioners for quashing of the criminal proceedings in Complaint Case-CR Case No.06/2017 filed under Section 190 read with section 200 of the Cr.PC, 1973 against the petitioners and also assailing the impugned order dated 09.04.2019 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dimapur, Nagaland in C.R. Case No. 06/2017 whereby the learned Magistrate had taken cognizance of offences under Sections 405/406/409/415/420 IPC read with Sections 34/120B of the IPC and issued process against all the 7(seven) persons arraigned therein as accused including the present petitioners.
3. The petitioner No. 1, Engineering Projects (India) Limited is a company, Government of India Enterprise and the petitioner Nos. 2 to 6 are employees in the company functioning in different capacities. Pending present petition, the petitioner No. 2 & 3 died, Respondent 2 has been striked off by the order dated 04.07.2022. The petitioners have approached this Court jointly as the reliefs sought for are common and identical in nature.
4. The case of the petitioners is that a complaint petition was filed by M/S J.A. Brothers, represented by its proprietor, Sri. James Akham before the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dimapur, Nagaland against the petitioners alleging inter-alia, commission of offences under Sections 405/406/409/415/420 of IPC read with Sections 34/120B of IPC. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dimapur, Nagaland on receipt of the complaint petition took cognizance on 12.06.2017 and issued process against all the 7 (seven) accused named in the complaint including the present petitioners directing them to appear before the said Court. On receipt of the summons, the petitioners approached this Court being Criminal Petition No. 9(K)/2017 challenging the cognizance order dated 12.06.2017 whereby this Court by order dated 28.02.2019 set aside the impugned order dated 12.06.2017 on the ground of non-compliance with the provisions of Section 200 and 202 of Cr.PC and remanded back the case to the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dimapur, Nagaland. In compliance with the order of this Court, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dimapur, Nagaland again took cognizance of the case on 09.04.2019 against the petitioners under Sections 405/406/409/415/420 of IPC read with Sections 34/120B of IPC without compliance of the mandatory provisions under Section 200 Cr.PC.
5. The facts behind the institution of the complaint by the respondent no. 2 are as follows:
(i) That Engineering Projects (India) Limited (hereinafter referred to as Petitioner No. 1.) being desirous of “Construction of Platoon Level-10 Nos. and Company Level – 03 Nos. of BOP along Indo-Bangladesh Border in the State of Mizoram”, on behalf of the Ministry of Home Affairs, Department of Border Management, Government of India, had published a Notice Inviting Tender bearing No. DLI/CON/644/346 dated 14.09.2012 inviting Percentage Rate Tenders in two bids (Techno Commercial & Price Bid) for the construction work of 10 Nos. of Platoon Level Border Out Posts (BOP) and 03 Nos. Company Level of Border Out Posts (BOP) along India – Bangladesh Border in the State of Mizoram at an Estimated Cost of Rs. 65.24/-Crores. The time of completion of the Work was 18 (eighteen) months.
(ii) that the complainant-M/s J.A. Brothers (hereinafter referred to as R2 ) had participated in the above-referred tender process vide their Tender dated 28.09.2012 and Engineering Projects (India) Limited, Petitioner No. 1, had accepted the tender of M/s J.A. Brothers, R2, and a Letter of Intent (LoI) dated 19.11.2012 was issu
Himadri Chemicals Industries Ltd. v. Coal Tar Refining Co.
Hindustan Construction Co. Ltd v. State of Bihar
Standard Chartered Bank v. Heavy Engg. Corpn. Ltd
Vesa Holdings (P) Ltd. v. State of Kerala
Sushil Sethi v. State of Arunachal Pradesh
Standard Chartered Bank & Anr. v. Directorate of Enforcement & Others
Bhushan Kumar & Anr. v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr.
Vadolal Panchal v. Ghadgaonkar
Thermax Ltd. & Ors. vs. K.M. Johny & Ors.
U.P. State Sugar Corpn. Vs. Sumac International Ltd.
Hira Lal Hari Lal Bhagwati vs. CBI
Chief Enforcement Officer vs. Videocon International Ltd. & Ors.
Hridaya Ranjan Prasad Verma & Ors. vs. State of Bihar & Anr.
Maksud Saiyed v. State of Gujarat
Pepsi Foods Ltd v. Special Judicial Magistrate
GHCL Employees Stock Option Trust v. India Infoline Ltd
Vinitec Electronics Private Ltd. V. HCL Infosystems Ltd.
K. Jagdish v. Udaya Kumar G.S.
Chirag M. Pathak & Ors v. Dollyben Kantital Patel & Ors.
Joseph Salvaraj A. v. State of Guajarat
Inder Mohan Goswami v. State of Uttaranchal
Anwar Chand Sab Nanadikar v. State of Karnataka
FIR quashed where bank guarantee invocation during validity constitutes civil commercial dispute sans mens rea for cheating/breach of trust; complainant suppressed settlement, abusing process without....
The court upheld the dismissal of discharge applications under Section 239, CrPC, confirming the existence of prima facie evidence for charges of criminal misappropriation and cheating against the ac....
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....
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.
Deception and criminal intent at the inception of a transaction are crucial for establishing the offences of criminal breach of trust and cheating under the Indian Penal Code.
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.