Back
ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
Md. Nazimuddin, S/o. Md. Mohiuddin – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard the parties.
2. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with a prayer for quashing the entire Complaint Case No.2391 of 2018 and order taking cognizance dated 29.11.2019 passed by Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Ranchi passed in Complaint Case No.2391 of 2018 under Sections 420, 504 and 506 of Indian Penal Code.
3. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner supplied inferior quality of ply wood to the opposite party no.2-complainant.
4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that admittedly, the petitioner has supplied the ply wood; there is no allegation that the petitioner had any dishonest or fraudulent intention and the dispute between the parties is basically a civil dispute. In support of its case, the learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Deepak Gaba & Ors. vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. reported in (2023) 3 SCC 423, paragraph nos.28, 30, 32 and 34 of which reads as under:-
A mere breach of contract does not necessarily amount to cheating under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code.
The judgment established that not every breach of contract amounts to a criminal offence and emphasized the importance of the presence of deception and dishonesty at the inception of a transaction to....
Breach of contract does not constitute cheating unless dishonest intention and deception existed from transaction's inception; civil disputes cannot be criminalized without initial fraud.
A mere breach of contract does not amount to cheating unless fraudulent or dishonest intention is shown right at the beginning of the transaction.
While exercising powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., Court has a very limited jurisdiction and is required to consider “whether any sufficient material is available to proceed further against accused f....
For an offence under Section 420 IPC, essential deception must exist from the transaction's inception; mere breach of contract is insufficient to constitute cheating.
The court ruled that criminal proceedings should not be initiated for civil disputes, as essential ingredients for the alleged offences were not present, emphasizing the need to prevent abuse of the ....
Criminal courts should ensure that proceedings are not used for settling civil disputes.
The court held that mere non-payment of dues in a commercial transaction does not constitute criminal offences under IPC Sections 406 and 420, emphasizing the distinction between civil and criminal l....
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
