IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.
Kaushar Ansari, S/o. Md. Khalil Ansari - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand & Ors. - Opposite Parties
Cr. M.P. No. 2378 of 2021
Decided On : 18-07-2023
Indian Penal Code - Criminal Proceedings - Sections 406, 420 - Summary
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner took a vehicle on hire, paid installments for nine months, and then allegedly informed the complainant that the vehicle was lost. The magistrate found a prima facie case for offenses under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner did not have the intention to cheat the complainant from the beginning of the transaction, and the offenses under Sections 406 and 420 were not made out.
Issues: Whether the offenses under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code were made out based on the allegations.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the necessity of proving the intention to cheat from the inception for the offense under Section 420 and the requirement of dishonest disposition or retention for the offense under Section 406.
Final Decision: The entire criminal proceeding, including the order dated 20.02.2019, was quashed and set aside.
JUDGMENT :
Heard the parties.
2. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure with a prayer to quash the entire criminal proceeding including the order dated 20.02.2019 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Koderma in Complaint Case No.693 of 2017 by which the learned Magistrate has found prima facie case for the offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code and now the case is pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Koderma.
3. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner took one Hywa vehicle on hire with a promise to deposit Rs.53,700/- every month with the finance company from which company the complainant took the Hywa vehicle. The petitioner paid the said amount for nine months and thereafter stopped paying the money and when the complainant approached the petitioner-accused person, the petitioner-accused person informed him that the Hywa vehicle has been lost and only after getting the same he will deposit the money as promised by him.
4. The learned Magistrate vide order dated 20.02.2019 after taking into consideration the complaint, statement on solemn affirmation of the complainant and the statement of the inquiry witnesses found prima facie case for the offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that even if the allegations made in the complaint is considered to be true in its entirety; still neither the offence punishable under Sections 420 nor under section 406 of the Indian Penal Code is made out. It is next submitted that the petitioner handed over the said vehicle in question to one Jhuku Chakrobarty @ Shyamal Chakrobarty but the vehicle was not with him and one Ishrafil Ansari lodged Topchanchi P.S. Case No.02 of 2018 involving the offences punishable under Sections 420/34 of the Indian Penal Code in which case police has submitted charge-sheet against the said Jhuku Chakrobarty @ Shyamal Chakrobarty. It is next submitted that the petitioner had no intention of cheating the complainant nor the petitioner has dishonestly misappropriated any property of the complainant. Hence, even if the allegations made in the complaint, statement on solemn affirmation of the complainant and the statement of the inquiry witnesses are accepted to be true in its entirety still the offence punishable under Sections 420 or 406 of the Indian Penal Code is not made out. Hence, it is submitted that the entire criminal proceeding including the order dated 20.02.2019 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Koderma in Complaint Case No.693 of 2017 be quashed and set aside.
6. Learned Addl.P.P. appearing for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for quashing the entire criminal proceeding including the order dated 20.02.2019 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Koderma in Complaint Case No.693 of 2017 and submits that the materials in the record reveals that both the offences punishable under Sections 420 and 406 of the Indian Penal Code are made out. Hence, it is submitted that this Cr.M.P. being without any merit, be dismissed.
7. Having heard the submissions made at the Bar and after carefully going through the materials available in the record, it is pertinent to mention here that it is a settled principle of law as has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Dalip Kaur and Ors. Vs. Jagnar Singh & Anr. reported in (2009) 14 SCC 696, para 10 of which reads as under:-
Dalip Kaur and Ors. Vs. Jagnar Singh & Anr.
The intention to cheat from the inception is essential for the offense under Section 420, and dishonest disposition or retention is required for the offense under Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code....
The necessity of proving fraudulent or dishonest intention for the offences of criminal breach of trust and cheating, and the distinction between civil and criminal disputes.
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....
A mere breach of contract does not constitute cheating or criminal breach of trust without evidence of initial deceptive intent or dishonest misappropriation.
No offence under Sections 406/420 IPC without deception at transaction inception or entrustment with dishonest misappropriation; business account disputes civil, not criminal; proceedings quashed und....
Intention to cheat must be established from the inception of the transaction; absence of mens rea negates the offence under Section 420 IPC.
A mere inability to repay a loan does not amount to cheating unless there was deception from the inception of the transaction.
A loan default does not constitute cheating unless there was fraudulent intention at the inception of the agreement, distinguishing civil disputes from criminal offenses.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.