ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
R. N. Singh @ Ram Nath Singh, S/o Late Ambika Prasad Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
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 and set aside the entire criminal proceeding arising out of Complaint Case No.336 of 2016 including the order taking cognizance dated 04.04.2017 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Bokaro whereby and where under the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Bokaro has found prima facie case for the offences punishable under Sections 420/406 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioner.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the instant Cr.M.P. is not pressed on behalf of the petitioner No.1 namely R.N. Singh @ Ram Nath Singh as he has died.
4. In view of this submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners, this Cr.M.P. is rejected as not pressed in respect of the petitioner No.1 namely R.N. Singh @ Ram Nath Singh.
5. The allegation against the petitioner No.2 is that the petitioner No.2 being a partner of M/s R.N. Singh and Company was taking petrol and diesel on the basis of the credit note, but did not pay the outstanding dues. Earlier, a complaint case
Binod Kumar & Others vs. State of Bihar & Another reported in (2014) 10 SCC 663
Uma Shankar Gopalika vs. State of Bihar & Another reported in (2005) 10 SCC 336
Vesa Holdings Private Limited & Another vs. State of Kerala & Others reported in (2015) 8 SCC 293
Vir Prakash Sharma vs. Anil Kumar Agarwal & Another reported in (2007) 7 SCC 373
A mere breach of contract does not constitute cheating or criminal breach of trust without evidence of initial deceptive intent or dishonest misappropriation.
Criminal proceedings cannot be sustained where allegations do not demonstrate fraudulent intent or dishonest misappropriation from the inception of the transaction.
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 inability to repay a loan does not amount to cheating unless there was deception from the inception of the transaction.
Point of law : exercise powers under Section 482 CrPC, the complaint in its entirety shall have to be examined on the basis of the allegation made in the complaint/FIR/charge-sheet and the High Court....
Non-payment in a commercial transaction does not constitute criminal breach of trust or cheating unless there is evidence of dishonest intention from the inception.
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....
Inability to repay a loan does not constitute criminal cheating without evidence of fraudulent intent or deception at the transaction's inception.
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.
Mere loan default does not amount to cheating under IPC unless fraudulent intent is proven from the inception of the transaction.
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.