Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Mr Justice Rakesh Kainthla, J
Jaswant Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Rakesh Kainthla, J.
The petitioner has filed the present petition for quashing of F.I.R. No. 144 of 2024, dated 18.11.2024, for the commission of an offence punishable under Section 318 (4) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), registered at Police Station Paddar, District Mandi H.P. and the consequential proceedings arising out of the FIR.
2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present petition are that respondent No. 2, the informant, made a complaint to the police asserting that he received a call from Prem Chand on 27.09.2024 for lending money to purchase the land. The informant declined by saying that he also intended to purchase the land. Prem Chand said that the accused had some land available with him. The informant talked to the accused, who said that he had land measuring 12 Biswas for sale at Jail Road, Mandi, District Mandi, H.P., however, the land was mortgaged to State Bank of India, Mandi. The accused said that he had reached an agreement with the Branch Manager and an amount of Rs.32,00,000/- (Rupees Thirty-Two Lakhs) was to be paid to the bank. Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs) was to be paid to the owner. He also said that he had only Rs.23,00,000/- (
The court held that misrepresentation in a land sale transaction constituted cheating under Section 318(4) of BNS, and the FIR could not be quashed as it disclosed a cognizable offence.
The court held that an FIR cannot be quashed if it discloses cognizable offences, and allegations of mala fide do not suffice for quashing proceedings.
Mere breach of contract does not constitute cheating unless fraudulent intention is established from the outset, as per Section 420 IPC.
The court ruled that an FIR cannot be quashed based on allegations of mala fides if it discloses cognizable offences, emphasizing the necessity of a trial to assess the truth of the allegations.
The court held that allegations in the FIR constituted a cognizable offence, and the petition for quashing the FIR was dismissed.
The court upheld the FIR against the petitioner, ruling that sufficient allegations existed to constitute cognizable offences, and the truth of these allegations could not be evaluated at the quashin....
The court cannot assess the truthfulness of allegations in an FIR at the quashing stage; it must determine if the FIR discloses a prima facie case for proceeding.
The court emphasized that speculative allegations without substantial evidence cannot sustain criminal proceedings, and individuals possess the right to manage their property affairs without undue in....
An FIR cannot be quashed if the allegations, taken at face value, indicate the commission of cognizable offences, and the court cannot assess their truthfulness at this stage.
The court emphasized the limited circumstances in which an FIR/complaint can be quashed, as per the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court.
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
