The ingredients of the offence of cheating under Section 420 of the IPC are not satisfied where there is no wrongful loss to any person and no wrongful gain to the accused.

Swatanter Kumir, J.

1. The petitioner in this petition under sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, has prayed that this Court may quash First Information Report No.60, dated May 19, 1993 Police Station Civil Lines, Patiala, registered under sec. 420 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. The facts necessary for the disposal of this petition are that petitioner Om Parkash is a student of M. B. B. S. in Government Medical College, Patiala. While he was taking the examination on May 18, 1993, he was found copying and according to the Invigilators he had tried to replace the pages of the Answer Sheet. It was found that this petitioner had smuggled the Answer Sheet, and he was alleged to have received the same from a person outside Examination Hall and even the other boy was caught at the spot. After the Authorities had written a letter being letter No.1856/ K. P. dated May 18, 1993 to the Deputy Superintendent Police of Patiala who after receipt of this letter, registered above mentioned First Information Report against the petitioner.

3. In the meanwhile vide order, dated March 1,1994 the Principal. Government Medical College Patlala, had conveyed the decision of the University wherein it was stated that the petitioner had been disqualified by the Punjabi University, Patiala for two years under Ordinance 13 and 22.1 vide Notification dated February 3, 1994. Consequently, his name was struck off the rolls of the College with immediate effect.

4. The First Information Report was registered against the petitioner under sec. 420 of the Indian Penal Code.

5. The basic contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the allegations as made in the First Information Report, do not constitute any offence, much less an offence under sec. 420 of the Indian Penal Code. It will be appropriate to reproduce sec. 420 of the Code: 420 Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property. Whoever cheats and thereby dishonestly induces the person deceived to deliver any property to any person, or to make, alter or destroy the whole or any part of a valuable security or anything which is signed or sealed and which is capable of being converted in to a valuable security

6. Normally, the Court would not interfere at this stage of the case because it has been alleged in the reply that challan has been filed but the challan was filed after the present petition had been filed before this Court. The case involves basically a question of law, i. e. , of jurisdiction and, as such, it will be appropriate to deal with this matter in the case of The State of Haryana and others V/s. Ch. Bhajan Lal and others, their Lordships of the Supreme Court have settled the law that where the allegations as made in the Report do not constitute an offence, the Fist Information Report can be quashed by the Court. Thus, I revert back to the contention of the, learned counsel as to whether the First Information Report as it reads, makes out an offence under sec. 420 of the Penal Code. The allegation in the First Information Repots is not that the petitioner has cheated or dishonestly induced the person deceived to deliver any property to the petitioner or even the petitioner is not alleged to have altered or destroyed whole or any part of the valuable security or anything which is signed or sealed and which is capable of being converted into a valuable security. The petitioner was caught copying and as alleged he had brought some write answer Sheets to the Examination Hall which he had replaced. The conduct of the petitioner is nothing worth of appreciate but for this misconduct he has already been punished in accordance with the Rules and Regulations of the University and has been disqualified for a period of two years vide order, dated March 1, 1994 certainly, it is not intended to be said that it involves double jeopardy but the offence for which the petitioner has been challaned by the Police at the complaint to the University, is certainly not made out.