The main legal point established in the judgment is that the absence of dishonest intention and the essential elements of cheating under Section 420 IPC led to the dismissal of the complaint under Section 203 Cr.P.C.

ORDER :

Aggrieved by the order of the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-IX, Ernakulam, under Section 203 Cr.P.C, dismissing CMP No.1649/2016, a protest complaint filed by the revision petitioner, consequent to the referral report filed by the Palarivattom Police in Crime No. 980/2014, stating that as false, he has come up on revision before this Court.

2. The revision petitioner had originally filed CMP No. 2866/2014 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-I, Ernakulam alleging an offence under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code against the accused who is the 2nd respondent herein. That complaint was forwarded to the SHO, Palarivattom Police Station for investigation under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C and in consequence, the aforesaid crime No.980/2014 was registered and investigated upon and found to be false. That final report was accepted by the Magistrate. Aggrieved by that, the complainant approached this Court by filing Crl.R.P No.593/2017 and the same was allowed by this Court vide order dated 07/11/2017 and directed the learned Magistrate to consider the protest complaint filed by the complainant as CMP No.1649/2016. The Magistrate thereafter conducted an enquiry under Section 202 of the Cr.P.C. The complainant was examined as PW1 and his witnesses were examined as PWs 2 and 3. Vide the impugned order dated 01/03/2018, the CMP was dismissed under Section 203 Cr.P.C.

3. The facts allegations made by the revision petitioner in the complaint, in brief, are thus:

During November, 2012 the accused dishonestly induced the complainant to enter into an agreement to exchange his 2009 model Tata Safari SUV for a sale consideration of Rs.5 lakhs with the Maruti Alto 2009 model car belonging to the complainant for a sale consideration of Rs.1.4 lakhs. The complainant allegedly paid in advance of Rs.1 lakh and also transferred his car to the accused and thereafter, the SUV was hypothecated with the Pathanamthitta branch of Central Bank for a sum of Rs.3.5 lakhs, which too was handed over to the accused. Only after the sale was completed, did the complainant realise that the SUV was badly damaged in a road traffic accident and that it was actually registered as a taxi car requiring payment of huge amount as road tax and insurance premium. That apart, the accused also did not return the amount of Rs.90,000/- due to the complainant as a result of the exchange deal, and thus treated the complainant, who was thus constrained to file the complaint before the Magistrate's Court which resulted in dismissal.

4. The revision petitioner is an Advocate practising in the High Court of Kerala. The accused 2nd respondent is a junior cine artist struggling to establish himself in the field. They got acquainted through common friends namely Biji Mathew and Saji Verghese. The accused was also conducting a restaurant near the Gold Souk, Vytilla, under the name and style, 'Mappila Kada'. He was in dire need of money to spruce up his restaurant. He expressed his intention to sell his Tata Safari SUV, which he said was in a very good condition. He offered to purchase the applicant's Maruti Alto car and a deal was struck for the sale consideration referred to above. However, the complainant wanted to see the vehicle. The accused told him that the vehicle was in the possession of a moneylender in Cherthala to whom he owed some money and that the SUV would be released only on payment of Rs.1 lakh. The very next day, the complainant expressed his desire to see the vehicle and went to Cherthala. The vehicle has been in the possession of the moneylender for the past 4 months and was all covered with dust. In order to refrain from payment of higher amount as tax, he had planted a registration plate with a white background instead of the usual yellow background required for a taxi vehicle. It is contended that the Court below has gone for a detailed evaluation of the evidence in the case and the probabilities and improbabilities of the case of t