Back
KARDAK ETE
Yari Tok @ Tok Yari, D/o. Late Tok Kapa – Appellant
Versus
State Of A. P. , Represented by the Public Prosecutor – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Heard Ms. N. Anju, learned Amicus Curiae for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. T. Ete, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Arunachal Pradesh. None appears for the respondent no. 2, despite service of notice.
2. This is an application under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., 1973 praying for quashing of the F.I.R. registered as Nirjuli P.S. Case No. 48 of 2021 under Sections 417/420 of the IPC, 1860 read with Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.
3. The case emanates from an F.I.R. lodged by the respondent no. 2, namely, Shri Nich Serbi, on 17.06.2021 before the Officer-in-Charge, Nirjuli Police Station, alleging that he had given a loan of Rs. 9,90,000/-(Rupees Nine Lakhs Ninety Thousand) only to the petitioner on 26.01.2020. The said loan was taken by the petitioner on the promise that same would be returned within a month. However, the petitioner did not repay the said loan amount. The respondent no. 2/informant had asked for return of the said loan amount. Since, the petitioner was not in a position to repay the said loan amount, they executed an agreement on 02.10.2020, wherein, she had agreed to repay the amount within 05.10.2020. Despite such agr
The court reiterated that a mere breach of contract does not constitute a criminal offence unless fraudulent or dishonest intention is established, quashing the FIR due to lack of supporting evidence....
Criminal proceedings cannot be used as a shortcut for civil remedies, and the ingredients of the offence of cheating must be prima facie discernible for the continuation of criminal proceedings.
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....
A mere breach of contract does not preclude a finding of criminal cheating; fraud must be established at the agreement's inception.
The presence of specific sections in the FIR prevented its quashing, and the petitioner was allowed to raise the plea of Section 142(1)(a) of the N.I. Act at an appropriate stage before the appropria....
The judgment establishes that the absence of dishonest intention at the inception of a transaction is critical for a conviction under Section 420 IPC, and that a complaint under Section 138 of the N.....
Civil disputes should not be framed as criminal offences when no fraudulent intent is evident, as it constitutes an abuse of legal processes.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
