Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
Nabibullah Siddique @ Shahjada @ Shahjada Siddique @ Md. Nabibullah Siddique – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of the loan and allegations. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments regarding the application of criminal law. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. court's analysis on the legal standards for cheating and breach of trust. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. ratio decidendi on quashing of criminal proceedings. (Para 13) |
| 5. conclusion on the quashing of the case. (Para 14 , 15) |
JUDGMENT :
ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.
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 the prayer to quash and set aside the entire criminal proceeding including the order dated 23.05.2017 passed in connection with Dhanbad P.S. Case No.769 of 2016 corresponding to G.R. Case No.4844 of 2016 by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad whereby and where under the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad has taken cognizance for the offences punishable under Sections 420/406/120B of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioners on the basis of the charge sheet submitted by the police after investigation of the case.
3. The allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners took friendly
Inability to repay a loan does not constitute criminal cheating without evidence of fraudulent intent or deception at the transaction's inception.
A mere inability to repay a loan does not amount to cheating unless there was deception from the inception of the transaction.
Mere loan default does not amount to cheating under IPC unless fraudulent intent is proven 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.
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 dispute over loan repayment, lacking evidence of deception or fraudulent intent, is deemed a civil matter and does not justify criminal proceedings under the Indian Penal Code.
A loan default does not constitute cheating unless there was fraudulent intention at the inception of the agreement, distinguishing civil disputes from criminal offenses.
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
