Back
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Kaushik Goswami
Brajendra Das Son of Late Niranjan Das – Appellant
Versus
State of Assam – Respondent
JUDGMENT & ORDER :
Heard Ms. B. Goswami, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. P.S. Lahkar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State respondent.
2. None appears for the respondent no.2. Pertinent that the name of the learned counsel appearing for the respondent no.2 is reflected in the cause-list.
3. Accordingly, the matter is taken up for final disposal.
4. By filing this petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C read with Section 401/397 of the Cr.P.C, 1973, the petitioner is seeking quashing of the impugned order dated 14.08.2018 passed by the learned Sub- Divisional Judicial Magistrate (S) No.1, Kamrup(M) at Guwahati, whereby the learned Magistrate Court had taken cognizance of the offences under Section 420/406 of IPC against the accused/petitioner as well as quashing of the whole proceeding and C.R. Case No.2343c/2016 pending before the learned Sub- Divisional Judicial Magistrate (S) No.1, Kamrup(M) at Guwahati.
5. The facts of the case is that the complainant/respondent no.2 filed a complaint petition before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup(M) at Guwahati on 30.07.2016 stating inter- alia that the complainant/respondent no.2 was sear
A mere breach of contract does not constitute criminal cheating unless fraudulent intent is established at the outset of the transaction.
A mere breach of contract does not amount to a criminal offence unless fraudulent intent is established from the outset.
(1) Issuance of process – Mere existence of some grounds which would be material in deciding whether accused should be convicted or acquitted does not generally indicate that case must necessarily fa....
Non-payment of dues does not constitute criminal cheating or breach of trust unless fraudulent intent is established from the inception of the transaction.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of establishing fraudulent or dishonest intention at the beginning of a transaction to constitute the offence of cheating under ....
Offence of cheating - Quash of criminal complaint - There is no fraudulent or dishonest inducement of a person induced to deliver any property to any person again same is not the case her – Court not....
The distinction between breach of contract and criminal cheating requires proof of fraudulent intent at the transaction's inception.
Mere non-payment for goods in a civil transaction cannot constitute cheating or criminal breach of trust under IPC; intent must be proven.
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
