HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N. ANAND VENKATESH, J.
Nithya - Appellant
Versus
State rep. by The Inspector of Police, Chennai & Ors. - Respondents
Criminal Original Petition No. 18308 of 2023 & Crl. M.P. Nos. 12169 & 12171 of 2023
Decided On : 10-01-2024
Cheating - Criminal Breach of Trust - Indian Penal Code, Section 406, Section 420, Section 34 - The court discussed the allegations of cheating and criminal breach of trust under Sections 406 and 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The court highlighted the prima facie evidence of the accused persons' criminal intent to cheat and the failure to deliver the promised flats, leading to the conclusion that the case involved criminality and was not purely civil in nature. The court also emphasized that the filing of complaints before the NCDRC did not bar the maintenance of a criminal complaint, as the same act could give rise to both civil and criminal actions.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, as a director of two companies, was accused of luring complainants to invest in projects, resulting in a loss of Rs.13.64 Crores. The complainants alleged cheating and criminal breach of trust, leading to the registration of a first information report and subsequent criminal proceedings.
Finding of the Court:
The court found prima facie evidence of the petitioner's active involvement in the business and her implication in the statements of the complainants. It concluded that the case involved criminal intent to cheat and that the filing of complaints before the NCDRC did not bar the criminal complaint.
Issues: The issues involved the alleged cheating and criminal breach of trust by the accused persons, the implication of the petitioner as a director, and the maintenance of a criminal complaint despite complaints filed before the NCDRC.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the prima facie evidence of criminal intent, the failure to deliver promised flats, and the legal principle that the same act could give rise to both civil and criminal actions.
Final Decision: The criminal original petition was dismissed, allowing the petitioner to raise her defense before the lower court.
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: PETITION under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code to call for the entire records in C.C.No.2150 of 2023 on the file of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate Court (CCB & CBCID), Egmore, Chennai and quash the same.)
1. This criminal original petition has been filed by fourth accused to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.2150 of 2023 on the file of the Metropolitan Magistrate for Exclusive Trial of CCB Cases (Relating to Cheating Cases in Chennai) & CBCID Metro Cases, Egmore, Chennai-8 (for short, the Court below).
2. The case leading to filing of this petition is as follows :
(i) Respondents 2 and 3 lodged a complaint before the first respondent against two companies, the petitioner, who is director of the companies and the other directors on the ground that the complainants were lured to invest in the projects undertaken by the two companies namely accused Nos.1 and 2 and thereby the complainants had parted with huge sums of money to the tune of Rs.13.64 Crores.
(ii) The grievance of the complainants is that the project was never completed by the companies namely accused Nos.1 and 2 and that the complainants were left high and dry. It has been alleged that the complainants were cheated by the accused persons and that the directors of the two companies also committed criminal breach of trust.
(iii) The complaint was taken on file and a first information report came to be registered on 24.1.2022 in Crime No.24 2022 on the file of the first respondent as against six accused persons. The petitioner has been added as the fourth accused in her capacity as the director of the two companies and wife of the third accused.
(iv) Thereafter, accused Nos.1 to 5 filed Crl.O.P.No.17795 of 2022 before this Court seeking to quash the first information report registered in Crime No.24 of 2022 on the file of the first respondent. This Court disposed of the said quash petition by order dated 17.8.2022, the relevant portions of which are extracted as hereunder :
"3. A perusal of the First Information Report indicate that huge amount has been invested under the pretext of construction of two residential flats and the amount has been invested in the year 2017. However, project has not seen the light of the day. According to the petitioner, a sum of Rs.13.64 crores has been invested.
4. It is a clear case of inducement and having lured the parties to invest such a huge amount, the project is not completed and the flats are not handed over. On perusal of the materials on record, this Court is of the view that the matter requires to be probed further.
5. At this stage, the learned counsel for the respondents 2 and 3 would submit that one more chance may be give to the parties to mediate the issue and if in the mediation nothing works out, thereafter, the investigation shall proceed.
6. Considering the nature of dispute between the parties and the fact that the receipt of the amount is not disputed, this Court is of the view that the matter can be referred to mediation and outer time limit for mediation shall fixed as one month and within one month, if the mediation is not fructified, the police is at liberty to proceed with the investigation and file final report as per law.
7. With the consent of both sides, that
i] Mr.N.Kirubakaran, Judge [Retd.], High Court, Madras, residing at No.36, 2nd Cross Street, Rayala Nagar, Ramapuram, Chennai – 600 089, Mobile No.9445025454 is appointed as a Mediator to mediate the matter.
ii] the learned Mediator after issuing notice to the parties for mediation in the first week of September, 2022, is requested to conclude mediation proceedings within a period of one month from the date of first mediation.
iii] the learned Mediator shall fix his fees and the same shall be borne by the parties equally.
8. It is made clear that if nothing f
The main legal point established is that the filing of civil complaints does not bar the maintenance of a criminal complaint for the same act, and the same act can give rise to both civil and crimina....
Criminal law cannot address purely civil disputes without clear evidence of fraudulent intent.
The judgment established that not every breach of contract amounts to a criminal offence and emphasized the importance of the presence of deception and dishonesty at the inception of a transaction to....
The main legal point established is that the continuation of a criminal proceeding would amount to an abuse of process of law if there is no allegation of deception or criminal intent at the inceptio....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that every breach of contract does not give rise to an offence of cheating, and the intention to cheat must be present at the very inception. The j....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.