SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2001 Supreme(Jhk) 87

Jharkhand High Court
A.K.PRASAD, J.
Hindustan Copper Ltd. - Appellant
Versus
State Of Bihar - Respondent
CRIMINAL MISC. 8525 Of 2000
Decided On : 6 February, 2001

Headnote:Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 420 Cheating – wrongful with holding of Security deposit – dispute being of civil nature involving breach of contract nothing on record to show that since inception there was dishonest intention of petitions company – no offence u/s 420 made out application allowed (paras 1)

ORDER

A.K. Prasad, J.

1. Heard Mr. S.L. Agrawal, learned counsel for the petitioners. Sri S.N. Sinha, learned APF for the State, and Mr. O.K. Chakraverty, learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2. It is alleged that the com-plainant/opp. party No. 2 supplied the Sal-Timbers to M/s. Hindustan Copper Ltd. Ghatsila, on the basis of the purchase order dt. 2.12.1994, which was rejected by the petitioner/Company. The complainant further alleged that he was not given the permission to take back the Sal Woods in 1994, with the result that the complainant could not take back the Sal Timbers, which decayed due to the ravages of the weather and the petitioner/ Company has with-held the payment of security deposit of Rs. 40,000/- to the complainant. On plain reading of the complaint petition, it is evident that the dispute is of a civil nature and one which involves the breach of the contract. It cannot be gathered from the contents of the complaint petition that at the inception of the contract itself, there was any dishonest intention of the petitioner/Company (Hindustan Copper Ltd.), a Government of India Enterprises, and its officials who are the other petitioners, to cheat the complainant. On a careful consideration of the materials on record, I find that the case is of purely civil nature and no offence under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code is made out. Hence, this is a fit case in which the impugned order taking cognizance of the offence under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code is made out. Hence, this is a fit case in which the impugned order taking cog nizance of the offence under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, which is dated 25.9.2000 passed by the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghatsila, and the subsequent proceedings thereto should be quashed to secure the ends of justice, inasmuch as continuance of the criminal proceedings would be an abuse of the process of the Court. Hence, this application is allowed, the impugned order taking cognizance dt. 25.9.2000 and the subsequent criminal proceeding in C/I case No. 63 of 2000 pending in the Court of the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghatsila, is here quashed.

1. Petition allowed.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top