Back
VIVEK CHAUDHARY, OM PRAKASH SHUKLA
Ravi Babu – Appellant
Versus
State Of U. P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Shri S.C. Mishra, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Rajat Pradhan, Advocate, Shri Abhishek Awasthi, Advocate, Shri Ankit Yadav and Shri Nadeem Murtaza learned Counsel for the petitioner and Shri Amal Rastogi, Advocate, Shri Pritish Kumar, learned Counsel for the private respondent, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondents and perused the material placed on record.
2. These writ petitions, have been filed seeking quashing of FIR/Case Crime No.0514/2022 dated 03.08.2022 under Sections 352/406/420/447 and 506 Indian Penal Code, 1860, registered at Police Station-Vibhuti Khand Gomti Nagar, District-Lucknow
3. As the factual matrix in the above-captioned writ petitions emancipates from the same impugned First Information Report(FIR), these petitions are being decided by this common judgment.
4. Brief facts of the case are that the FIR was registered on the basis of a written complaint by Respondent Nos. 4 to 27, in relation to a premises situated at Rohtas Presidential Arcade, No. TC-G 4/4, Vibhuti Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow 226010, Uttar Pradesh ("Premises") leased by Rohtas Projects Limited ("Rohtas") in favour of Decathlon Sports India Private Limited ("Decath
The court established that criminal proceedings cannot be initiated for civil disputes, emphasizing that the FIR was an abuse of process aimed at coercing payment in a contractual matter.
Criminal proceedings can continue despite the civil nature of a dispute if criminal allegations are substantiated in the FIR.
The court established that FIRs should not be registered for civil disputes and emphasized the importance of distinguishing between civil and criminal matters to prevent abuse of the legal process.
A mere breach of contract does not preclude a finding of criminal cheating; fraud must be established at the agreement's inception.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a mere breach of contract cannot give rise to criminal prosecution for cheating unless fraudulent or dishonest intention is shown at the begin....
Criminal jurisdiction is restricted to the area where the offence occurred, and parties cannot confer jurisdiction through a contract; thus, allegations of fraud in a lease agreement without evidence....
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
