ORDER :

1. This is a petition under Section 561-A Cr.P.C. filed by the petitioner for quashing of FIR No. 46/2019 dated 25.03.2019, registered with Police Station, Kishtwar for offences under Section 420 of the RPC.

2. Briefly stated the material facts are as under.

3. A written complaint was lodged by the complainant-respondent No. 2 here in before the Inspector General of Police, Crime Branch, Jammu alleging therein that the accused- petitioner approached the complainant and offered to sell his land measuring 4 marlas falling under khasra No. 112 situate at Lach Khazana, Kishtwar for an amount of Rs. 5.10 lacs.

4. It was alleged that the entire payment was made to the petitioner through bank transfers and that despite the assurance of the petitioner that land would be registered in his name within one month, the needful was not done.

5. It was further alleged that upon enquiry, the complainant came to know that the petitioner was not the exclusive owner of the property in question but a share holder along with others and was not competent to sell the same individually. This fact, it is alleged, was withheld from the complainant, as a result, for the last three years, neither the land had been transferred in his favour nor was the amount refunded.

6. Based upon the complaint so made, an FIR bearing No. 46/2019 was registered with the police station at Kishtwar against the petitioner.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner urged that the FIR ought not to have been registered as the matter was purely civil in nature and that the investigation and subsequent trial of the petitioner would be nothing but an abuse of the process of law.

8. It was also urged that the averments made in the complaint, even if taken at their face value did not constitute the offence of cheating.

9. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

10. It is no longer res-integra that this court does have the jurisdiction to quash a complaint or an FIR on the ground that it would amount to an abuse of the process of the court in a case where the court records its satisfaction that the averments contained in the complaint, assuming to be correct, did not reflect commission of an offence for which the case stands registered.

11. With a view to determine as to whether offence punishable under Section 420 RPC, is made out on a plain reading of the complaint based upon which the FIR was registered, it would be necessary to determine the main ingredients of the relevant Section.

12. Section 415 of the RPC envisages as under:

“Cheating: Whoever, by deceiving any person, fraudulently or dishonestly induces the person so deceived to deliver any property to any person, or to consent that any person shall retain any property or intentionally induces the person so deceived to do or omit to do anything which he would not do or omit if he were not so deceived, any which act of omission causes or is likely to cause damage or harm to that person in body, mind, reputation or property, is said to “cheat.”

Explanation - A dishonest concealment of facts is a deception within the meaning of this section.”

13. Therefore, the ingredients required to be established for punishment of an offence under Section 420 RPC are (i) deception of a person either by making a false or misleading representation or by other action or omission; (ii) fraudulent or dishonest inducement of any person any by deceiving him; (iii)(a) the person so deceived should be induced to deliver any property to any person, or to consent that any person shall retain any property; or (b) the person so deceived should be intentionally induced to do or omit to do anything which he would not do or omit if he were not so deceived and (iv) in cases covered by (iii)(b), the act of omission should be one which causes or is likely to cause damage or harm to the person induced in body, mind, reputation or property.

14. In G.V. Rao vs. L.H.V. Prasad and Others, (2000) 3 SCC 693, while dealing with the definition of “cheating” as contained in Sec