SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Jhk) 66

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.
Prem Nath Choudhary - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand - Opposite Party
Cr.M.P. No. 2982 of 2022
Decided On : 12-01-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Indrajit Sinha, Advocate, Mr. Ajay Kumar Sah, Advocate
For the Opposite Party :Mr. Manoj Kumar Mishra, Addl. P.P., Mr. Shubhashis Rasik Soren, Advocate, Ms. Shobha Gloria Lakra, Advocate

To constitute offences under Sections 420, 323, and 504 IPC, essential ingredients of intent, injury, or insult must be established at the onset; mere breach of contract or abusive language without these elements is insufficient.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code - Sections 420, 323, 504 - Quashing of criminal proceedings - Continuation of proceedings alleged to constitute wrongful deception, intentional insult, and causing hurt - Essential ingredients of said offences not made out - Charge not framed - Proceedings quashed to prevent abuse of process of law. (Paras 5 to 15)

(B) Cheating - Legal principle - Breach of contract does not constitute cheating unless deception occurred from the inception of the transaction. (Para 5)

(C) Intentional insult - Essential ingredients clarified; mere abuse does not satisfy criteria for Section 504 IPC. (Para 6)

(D) Hurt definition - Allegations must specify bodily harm to constitute Section 323 IPC. (Para 7)

Facts of the case:
The petitioners were accused of failing to deliver a vehicle after receiving payment, with allegations of abuse and coercion presented by the complainant. The petitioners contended the allegations were false, asserting lesser payments made. (Paras 4, 8, 11)

Findings of Court:
Essential elements for offences under Sections 420, 323, and 504 IPC not established, supporting the quashing of criminal proceedings. (Paras 12-15)

Issues: Whether the allegations contained the requisite elements for the charges of cheating, causing hurt, or intentional insult. (Paras 10-14)

Ratio Decidendi: Without proof of initial deceptive intent, allegations of cheating are unsubstantiated. Likewise, lack of specific claims regarding injury or insult negates the other charges. (Paras 10-14)

Result: Criminal miscellaneous petition allowed; proceedings quashed.

Table of Content
1. accusations against petitioners involve alleged cheating. (Para 2 , 4 , 11)
2. necessary elements for ipc offences discussed. (Para 5 , 6 , 7)
3. court finds no merit in the allegations. (Para 10 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15)
4. criminal proceeding quashed against petitioners. (Para 16 , 17)

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 of the Code of Criminal Procedure with the prayer to quash/set aside the entire criminal proceeding including the order taking cognizance dated 11.06.2019, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate -1st Class, Koderma in Complaint Case No. 1571 of 2018 involving the offences punishable under Sections 420/323/504 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioners.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that charge has not yet been framed in this case and the case is listed for evidence before charge before the trial court.

4. The allegation against the petitioners is that, the petitioners went to the house of the complainant and approached him to purchase one Back Loader worth Rs. 23,81,000/-. The complainant paid Rs.7,50,000/-. After that the petitioners promised to deliver the vehicle within fifteen days therefrom but the petitioners did not give the vehicle to the complainant. On 25.11.2018, when the complainant went to the petitioners, the petitioners abused him and drove him out by pushing him. There is further allegation that the petitioners apart from money have obtained twelve pieces of blank cheques signed by the complainant and also obtained the signatures of the complainant and his wife on a blank paper but did not give the vehicle. The learned Magistrate, on the basis of the complaint, statement of the complainant on solemn affirmation and the statement of the inquiry witnesses found prima facie case for the offences punishable under Section 420/323/504 of the Indian Penal Code.

5. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners relying upon the Judgment of this Court in the case ofRam Binod Choudhary & Ors. Vs. The State of Jharkhand & Anr., reported in2026 : JHHC :221 that therein this Court relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Uma Shankar Gopalika vs. State of Bihar & Another reported in (2005) 10 SCC 336 paragraph-6 of which reads as under:-

6. Xxxx xxxx xxxx It is well settled that every breach of contract would not give rise to an offence of cheating and only in those cases breach of contract would amount to cheating where there was any deception played at the very inception. If the intention to cheat has developed later on, the same cannot amount to cheating. In the present case it has nowhere been stated that at the very inception there was any intention on behalf of the accused persons to cheat which is a condition precedent for an offence under Section 420 IPC.” (Emphasis supplied)

wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has reiterated the settled principle of law that in order to constitute the offence of cheating, the accused must play deception since the beginning of the transaction between the parties and if the intention to cheat has developed later on, the same cannot amount to cheating.

6. It is next submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners relying upon the Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case ofVikram Johar vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Another reported in(2019) 14 SCC 207 , paragraph-24 of which reads as under:-

“24. Now, we revert back to the allegations in the complaint against the appellant. The allegation is that the appellant with two or three other unknown persons, one of whom was holding a revolver, came to the complainant's house and abused him in filthy language and attempted to assault him and when some neighbours arrived there the appellant and the other persons accompanying him fled the spot. The above allegation taking on its face value

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top