Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
Rajendra Prasad Gupta @ Rajendra Pd. Gupta – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. criminal proceedings based on non-payment (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. citing precedents on breach of trust and cheating (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. intent to cheat must be established for conviction (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. quashing of criminal proceedings due to lack of merit (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
JUDGMENT :
ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.
Heard the parties.
2. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with the prayer to quash and set aside the F.I.R. including the entire criminal proceedings of Chas P.S. Case No.192 of 2024 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 316 (2) and 318 (4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bokaro.
3. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner representing Sri Krishna Sales, approached the informant for the business of electronics goods. The business between the petitioner and the informant continued from 19.02.2022 to 13.06.2023 but thereafter the petitioner slowed down the payments and on 28.08.2023, a sum of Rs.4,25,336/- was due and payable by the petitioner to the i
Essential elements for criminal breach of trust include entrustment and dishonest intention; mere breach of contract does not establish criminal culpability.
The court held that mere breach of contract does not constitute a criminal offence of cheating or criminal breach of trust, emphasizing the necessity of fraudulent intent from inception.
A breach of contract does not constitute cheating unless there is initial deception; mere non-payment does not amount to criminal breach of trust.
Failure to honour land sale agreement, with buyer aware of tenancy restrictions and advance returned, does not constitute cheating or criminal breach of trust absent dishonest intention at 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.
The mere failure to pay for goods in a commercial transaction does not constitute criminal breach of trust or cheating under IPC without evidence of dishonest intention.
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
