A mere breach of contract does not constitute a criminal offence under IPC without evidence of fraudulent intent; the matter remains civil, permitting the aggrieved party to seek redress through civil litigation.

ORDER :

G. S. AHLUWALIA, J.

1. This application, under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., has been filed for quashment of Crime No.115/2023 registered at Police Station Inderganj, District Gwalior (M.P.) for the offence under Section 420 , 34 of IPC and all other consequential proceedings arising out of the aforesaid FIR.

2. It is submitted by counsel for applicants that on the basis of complaint made by respondent No.2, the police has registered FIR in Crime No.115/2023 at Police Station Inderganj, District Gwalior. The crux of the FIR is that applicants as well as respondent no.2 entered into an agreement to sell and accordingly an amount of Rs.14 lacs was also paid but now applicants are not executing sale-deed. It was further alleged that now it has come to the notice of respondent No.2 that applicants do not want to execute the sale-deed.

It is submitted by counsel for applicants that even if the entire allegations made in the FIR are considered on their face value, then it is predominantly of civil in nature and therefore conversion of this case into a criminal case is unwarranted and bad in law.

3. Per contra, it is submitted by counsel for respondent no.2 that the applicants after having received an amount of Rs.14 lacs entered into an agreement to sell and it was decided that remaining amount of Rs.08 lacs would be paid at the time of execution of sale deed but now the intention of the applicants has become dishonest and they are not executing the sale deed.

4. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

5. The primary question for consideration is as to whether the allegations made against the applicants make out a prima facie case under Section 420 of IPC or not?

6. It is well established principle of law that in order to bring the act within the purview of Section 420 of IPC , it has to be prima facie shown that the intention of the accused right from very inception was to cheat the complainant. A mere breach of contract would not give rise to criminal prosecution for cheating.

7. The Supreme Court in the case of Vijay Kumar Ghai & Others Vs. The State of West Bengal & Others reported in 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 305 has held as under:-

7. Predominantly, the Indian Judiciary has time and again reiterated that forum shopping take several hues and shades but the concept of ‘forum shopping’ has not been rendered an exclusive definition in any Indian statute. Forum shopping as per Merriam Webster dictionary is:-

“The practice of choosing the court in which to bring an action from among those courts that could properly exercise jurisdiction based on determination of which court is likely to provide the most favourable outcome”

8. The Indian judiciary’s observation and obiter dicta has aided in streamlining the concept of forum shopping in the Indian legal system. This Court has condemned the practice of forum shopping by litigants and termed it as an abuse of law and also deciphered different categories of forum shopping.

9. A two-Judge bench of this Court in Union of India & Ors. Vs. Cipla Ltd. & Anr. (2017) 5 SCC 262 has laid down factors which lead to the practice of forum shopping or choice of forum by the litigants which are as follows:-

“148. A classic example of forum shopping is when litigant approaches one Court for relief but does not get the desired relief and then approaches another Court for the same relief. This occurred in Rajiv Bhatia Vs. Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Others, (1999) 8 SCC 525. The respondent-mother of a young child had filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in the Rajasthan High Court and apparentl