Back
K. BABU
Hedge Equities Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala, Represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
K. Babu, J.
The petitioners who are accused in C.C.No.3094 of 2013 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Chengannur seek to quash all further proceedings in the calendar case. The petitioners and the other accused are alleged to have committed offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 and 120-B r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. The prosecution case was initiated based on Ext.P6 complaint filed by respondent No.2. Petitioners 1 and 2 are accused Nos.1 and 2, respectively. Accused No.3 is the Branch Manager of petitioner No.1 firm.
3. Accused No.1 is a stock broking firm registered with the National Stock Exchange and Bombay Stock Exchange under the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 (for short ‘SEBI Act’). Accused No.2 is the Managing Director of the firm.
4. Accused No.1 provides a platform for transactions in various equities and commodities to clients who open trading accounts with them. The complainant/respondent No.2, on 10.6.2010, entered into an agreement with accused No.1, authorising the former to make investments for and on behalf of her. Accused No.3, the Branch Manager of accused No.1 firm, and the complainant belong
A share broker cannot be prosecuted under IPC for disputes arising from investment transactions, which should be addressed under the SEBI Act.
The Court held that the inherent power of the High Court under Section 482 CrPC can be exercised to quash a criminal proceeding if it is found that the proceeding is an abuse of the process of the Co....
Fraudulent intent at the inception of a transaction is essential to establish cheating; mere breach of contract does not constitute a criminal offence.
Dishonest or fraudulent intention must be present at the inception of a transaction to establish offences of cheating and criminal breach of trust; mere breach of contract does not constitute a crimi....
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.
The court affirmed that a party only involved in a civil contract cannot face criminal liability unless it directly transacted or misappropriated funds, supporting the need for a clear distinction be....
A mere breach of contract does not constitute cheating under criminal law without evidence of fraudulent intent at the time of the contract's formation.
(1) Section 420 IPC is a serious form of cheating that includes inducement (to lead or move someone to happen) in terms of delivery of property as well as valuable securities.(2) While breach of cont....
A company can be held criminally liable for offences committed in relation to its business, and the court can impose a sentence of fine on the company even if the prescribed punishment includes impri....
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
