Back
ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
Tata Steel Utilities and Infrastructure Services Limited – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.
1. Heard the parties. Though notice has validly been served upon O.P. No. 2 but no one turns up on behalf of the Opp. Party no. 2 in spite of repeated calls.
2. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with a prayer to quash the entire criminal proceeding in connection with Complaint Case No. 67 of 2021 registered for the offence punishable under Section 420, 406, 504, 506 of the IPC pending in the court of learned JMFC, Jamshedpur as well as the order dated 05.08.2022 passed by learned JMFC, Jamshedpur whereby and where under, learned Magistrate has taken cognizance for the offence punishable under Section 406 and 420 of IPC against the employees of the petitioner company.
3. The allegation against the petitioner is that the two non-existent posts of the petitioner-company, namely General Manager (EPC), JUSCO and accused no. 2 being the Purchase Head, JUSCO which are non-existent posts, entrusted some work to be done by the complainant, firstly, for GOC, Burmamines and Tata Steel Division, TACP, but did not make the payment of the same.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner
The court ruled that allegations against non-existent posts do not constitute a basis for criminal proceedings, emphasizing the necessity of specific accusations against individuals for liability.
Every breach of contract does not constitute cheating; deception must be established from the inception for criminal liability.
The legal point established is that for summons to be issued, the accused must be a natural or juridical person, and specific allegations are necessary for determining vicarious liability.
The court affirmed that criminal proceedings cannot be used as leverage in civil disputes, emphasizing the need for proof of dishonest intent and necessary ingredients for offences claimed. Lack of v....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a criminal complaint lacking merit and based on a civil dispute, as well as a complaint rendered infructuous due to the liquidation of the com....
A breach of contract does not constitute cheating unless fraudulent intent is proven at the outset of the agreement, as established in relevant legal precedents.
A mere breach of contract does not constitute a criminal offense under IPC Sections 406 and 420; criminal proceedings should not be initiated without evidence of fraudulent intent.
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
