Back
SAURABH SHYAM SHAMSHERY
Arun Sharma – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Saurabh Shyam Shamshery, J.
Heard Sri. P.K. Singh and Sri. Arvind Srivastava, Advocate holding brief of Sri. Pratik Kumar, learned counsel for applicants and Sri. V.K.Upadhya, Advocate assisted by Sri. Ritvik Upadhya, learned counsel for O.P. No.2 and Mithilesh Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. The applicants before this Court are aggrieved by impugned order dated 16.01.2024 passed by Metropolitan Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar under Section 204 Cr.P.C., whereby they have been summoned to face trial under Sections 406, 504 and 506 I.P.C. along with other co-accused.
3. Learned counsel for applicants vehemently submitted that they have no concerned with the firm M/s V & P Enterprises. It was earlier run by father of applicants and any outstanding out of any transaction with said firm, would not devolve upon the applicants. Learned counsels also submitted that contents of complaint, statements of complainant recorded under Section 200 and statement of witnesses recorded under Section 202 Cr.P.C. are even considered to be true, still ingredients of offences under Sections 406, 504 and 506 I.P.C. are not made out.
4. Learned counsels referred judgments passed by Supreme Court i
Criminal liability under IPC sections requires clear evidence of entrustment and dishonest intention, which were absent in this case.
A mere breach of a promise, agreement, or contract does not, ipso facto, constitute the offence of criminal breach of trust contained in Section 405 IPC without there being a clear case of entrustmen....
Cognizance of offence – While at the stage of issuing summons Magistrate only needs to be satisfied with a prima facie case for taking cognizance, duty of Magistrate is also to be satisfied whether t....
A breach of contract does not constitute cheating unless fraudulent intent is proven at the outset of the agreement, as established in relevant legal precedents.
Fraudulent intent at the inception of a transaction is essential to establish cheating; mere breach of contract does not constitute a criminal offence.
Point of law : exercise powers under Section 482 CrPC, the complaint in its entirety shall have to be examined on the basis of the allegation made in the complaint/FIR/charge-sheet and the High Court....
Mere breach of contract does not constitute cheating under IPC unless there is evidence of dishonest intention from the outset.
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
