Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
Manish Shrivastava @ Manish Srivastava – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition filed under section 482 cr.p.c. for quashing proceedings. (Para 3 , 5) |
| 2. arguments against the allegations of misappropriation and lack of evidence. (Para 4 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. court finding insufficient grounds for proceeding with charges. (Para 10 , 12 , 13) |
| 4. distinction between breach of contract and criminal cheating established. (Para 11) |
| 5. quashing of criminal proceedings supported by court's view. (Para 14 , 15) |
JUDGMENT :
ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.
Heard the parties.
2. Though notices have validly been served upon opposite Party No. 2 yet no one turns 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 the Cr.P.C. with the prayer to quash the entire criminal proceeding arising out of C.P. Case No. 8721 of 2023 as well as order dated 18.12.2023 whereby and whereunder the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Dhanbad has found sufficient materials to proceed against the petitioners for having committed the offences punishable under Sections 406/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the char
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 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.
Allegations must demonstrate elements of criminal offenses; lack of evidence led to quashing proceedings to prevent abuse of legal process.
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.
A breach of contract does not constitute cheating unless there is initial deception; mere non-payment does not amount to criminal breach of trust.
Intention to cheat must be established from the inception of the transaction; absence of mens rea negates the offence under Section 420 IPC.
Breach of contract does not constitute cheating unless deception and dishonest intention at inception. Advance payment for property sale is not entrustment; mere non-execution of sale deed without mi....
A mere inability to repay a loan does not amount to cheating unless there was deception from the inception of the transaction.
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
