Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
Reena Lata @ Rina Lata, d/o late Kauleshwar Dhobi @ Kauleshwar Ram – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.
1. Heard the parties.
2. Though the opposite party no.2 has put in appearance through his lawyer but no one turns up on behalf of the opposite party no.2 in-spite of repeated calls.
3. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. with the prayer to quash/set aside the entire criminal proceeding including the order taking cognizance dated 12.08.2022 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Chatra in connection with Complaint Case No. 592 of 2020, whereby and where under, the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Chatra has found prima facie case for the offence punishable under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioner.
4. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner took a loan of Rs.5,00,000/- from the complainant with the promise to return the same within six months but did not repay the said amount and issued cheques for the purpose of security but the cheques on being presented by the complainant, in his bank account for payment, were dishonoured. The complainant filed two complaint cases but there was mediation consequent upo
A loan default does not constitute cheating unless there was fraudulent intention at the inception of the agreement, distinguishing civil disputes from criminal offenses.
A mere inability to repay a loan does not amount to cheating unless there was deception from the inception of the transaction.
Inability to repay a loan does not constitute criminal cheating without evidence of fraudulent intent or deception at the transaction's 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....
A breach of contract does not constitute cheating unless there is initial deception; mere non-payment does not amount to criminal breach of trust.
Mere loan default does not amount to cheating under IPC unless fraudulent intent is proven from the inception of the transaction.
The absence of initial deception or property entrustment negates offences of cheating and criminal breach of trust under IPC sections 420 and 406.
For offences under IPC Sections 420 and 406, there must be initial deception and property entrustment; lack of such elements results in quashing of proceedings.
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
