Back
ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
Rana Chakraborty, S/o. Late Amal Kumar Chakraborty – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.
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 to quash the entire criminal proceeding including the order dated 08.06.2022 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Dhanbad in C.P. Case No. 1166 of 2021 whereby and where under, the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Dhanbad found prima facie case for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406 and 34 of Indian Penal Code and ordered for issue of summons.
3. The allegation against the petitioner is that the complainant was working as a petty contractor in Dhanbad Zonal Railway. During the year 2017-18, the co-accused-Arun Agarwal got a work in that area. The petitioner who is permanent employee of Indian Railways and presently posted as Sr. Section Engineer at Hazaribagh Road and then working as a Junior Engineer along with other officers of Railways made the complainant to do the work of co-accused-Arun Agarwal with the promise to pay the bill of the complainant for the work thus done. The complainant did the work of co-accused-Arun Agarwal of Rs.20,00,000/-. The petitione
Intention to cheat must be established from the inception of the transaction; absence of mens rea negates the offence under Section 420 IPC.
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....
The mere breach of contract does not establish a case for criminal offences of cheating or breach of trust without evidence of deception or proper entrustment.
A breach of contract does not constitute cheating unless there is initial deception; mere non-payment does not amount to criminal breach of trust.
A mere breach of contract does not constitute cheating unless there is deception at inception; individual liability requires evidence of active role and criminal intent.
To constitute cheating or criminal breach of trust, there must be deceit at inception or dishonest misappropriation; mere breach of contract without such elements does not attract IPC provisions.
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.
Allegations of misappropriation under IPC Sections 406 and 34 cannot proceed without evidence of entrustment and dishonest intent; mere inability to repay a loan does not constitute criminal breach o....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that every breach of contract does not give rise to an offence of cheating, and the intention to cheat must be present at the very inception. The j....
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
