Back
2024 Supreme(Gau) 546
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
Arun Dev Choudhury, J.
Jakir Hussain And Anr S/o Moin Uddin - Appellant
Vs.
The State Of Assam And Anr Rep. By The PP, Assam - Respondent
Crl.Pet. No. 1045 of 2023
Decided On : 29-04-2024
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. R Ali
For the Respondent: PP, Assam, Mr. M. P. Goswami, Addl.PP, Mr. M. K. Hussain, Adv.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the distinction between civil disputes and criminal offenses, and the requirement of establishing fraudulent or dishonest intention for cheating. The court emphasized the essential ingredients of criminal breach of trust and cheating under IPC and applied these principles to quash the criminal proceeding.
Headnote:
Section 482 - Criminal Proceeding - 120(B)/406/420/506/34 of IPC - The court discussed the guidelines for exercising power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. and the essential ingredients of criminal breach of trust and cheating under Sections 405 and 415 of IPC. It emphasized the distinction between civil disputes and criminal offenses, and the requirement of establishing fraudulent or dishonest intention for cheating. The court quashed the criminal proceeding as the dispute was primarily civil in nature and lacked evidence of initial deception or dishonest use of property.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners filed an application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to challenge a criminal proceeding against them under Sections 120(B)/406/420/506/34 of IPC. The dispute arose from an agreement where the informant invested money with the petitioners, who failed to return the amount as agreed.
Finding of the Court:
The court analyzed the agreement and FIR, emphasizing the civil nature of the dispute and the lack of evidence to establish criminal offenses. It referred to the guidelines for exercising power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. and the essential ingredients of criminal breach of trust and cheating under IPC. The court concluded that the criminal proceeding lacked evidence of initial deception or dishonest use of property, and therefore, quashed the proceeding.
Issues: 1. Whether the dispute between the parties was primarily civil in nature. 2. Whether the criminal proceeding lacked evidence of initial deception or dishonest use of property. 3. Whether the court should exercise its power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to quash the criminal proceeding.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the distinction between civil disputes and criminal offenses, and the requirement of establishing fraudulent or dishonest intention for cheating. It also highlighted the essential ingredients of criminal breach of trust and cheating under IPC. The court applied these principles to the facts of the case and concluded that the criminal proceeding lacked evidence to support the charges.
Final Decision: The court quashed the criminal proceeding under Sections 120(B)/406/420/506/34 of IPC, emphasizing the civil nature of the dispute and the lack of evidence to establish criminal offenses. It clarified that the decision did not debar the informant from seeking legal remedy for recovery of the investment in a civil dispute.
1. Heard Mr. R. Ali, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. M. P. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent and Mr. M. K. Hussain, learned counsel for the respondent No. .
2. The present application is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. assailing the criminal proceeding being PRC No. 419/2023 under Section 120(B)/406/420/506/34 of IPC corresponding to Murajhar PS Case No. 86/2023 pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Hojai at Sankardev Nagar.
3. Mr. Ali, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that from the FIR, no material is disclosed to proceed against the petitioners and to prosecute them under Sections 406/420/506 of IPC.
4. Per contra, Mr. M. K. Hussain, learned counsel for the respondent/informant submits that the FIR is not always a gospel truth and the investigating officer has filed a charge sheet after completion of the investigation, and therefore, such criminal proceeding should not be stalled in exercise of power of this Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C..
5. This Court has given anxious consideration to the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties. Also perused the materials available on record.
6. Now for proper adjudication of the present case, let the FIR be quoted herein below:-
“Sir,
The humble submission of the informant is that the accused persons are kown to me. The accused No. 1 collected the electricity bills from the local area by taking on lease. The accused No. 1 and 2 by making conspiracy with a view to cheat the informant tried to make partner in the lease and tried to collect money from the informant through the accused No. 2.
Accordingly, the accused No. 1 and 2 demanded an amount of Rs. 30,00,000/- (Rupees thirty lakhs) only from the informant. The informant on good faith paid an amount of Rs. 15,00,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Lakhs) only to the accused persons. The accused persons accepted the amount of 15,00,000/-(Rupees Fifteen Lakhs) only 14.12.2020 from the informant by excuting an undertaking. The accused persons assured the informant to complete the execution of the lease term within 3 months. After 3 months, while I asked the accused persons, the accused persons deferred the matter by saying tomorrow or day after tomorrow. Thereafter, while a complaint was made before the public, the accused persons paid an amount of 5,00,000/- (Rupees Five lakhs) only to the informant and the accused persons seek more time to return the amount to the informant and the accused No. 2 executed 2 (two) Nos. of agreements with the informant. After expiry of time as per agreement, the informant demanded the money from the accused persons but the accused persons avoided the informant.
Today at about 11:00 AM, while the informant demanded the money, the accused persons threatened the informant in various manner. The accused persons violated the terms of the agreement. The accused persons cheated the informant by taking the advantage of simplicity of the informant and tried to mis-appropriate the money. The accused persons are hurt the feelings of the informant. The witnesses know the facts and they will explain the incident in details. As I was waiting for settlement, there is delay in filing the case. The Xerox copy of agreement executed the accused persons are annexed herewith.
Therefore, it is prayed that your honour would be pleased to investigate into matter and take necessary action against the accused persons”.
7. It is not in dispute that the amount was transferred under an agreement entered between the petitioners and informant/respondent which is part of the present proceeding.
8. From the agreement and the FIR, it is seen that the grievance of the informant is non return of the money as agreed in terms of the agreement dated 14.12.2020. The agreement was entered between the petitioner No. 1 and the respondent No. 2 and the petitioner No. 2 is the witness to such agreement. It is also not disputed that such agreement was entered
