Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF TELANGANA
ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI
Katravath Vijay Nayak – Appellant
Versus
State of Telangana – Respondent
ORDER :
Anil Kumar Jukanti, J.
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (for short ‘ BNSS ’) by the petitioner/accused No.3 to quash the proceedings against him in C.C.No.530 of 2022 on the file of XVII Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Rachakonda at Maheshwaram. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 406 , 420, 506 r/w 34 of INDIAN PENAL CODE (for short ‘IPC’).
2. Heard Mr. Shaik Khalid, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. S.Madhavi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the respondent – State. Perused the material on record.
3. Notice was served on respondent No.2 on 12.02.2025. A memo is filed vide U.S.R.No.16122 of 2025 along with a track consignment copy of with Event Details For:RN068093694IN, and it is reflected against the caption ‘Current Status’ as ‘Item delivered’ (Addressee). None appeared on behalf of respondent No.2, complainant.
4. FIR came to be registered on 16.02.2022 on the basis of complaint lodged by respondent No.2 herein. It is the specific case of respondent No.2 that her husband (died on 01.06.2020) was owner and possessor of agricultural land admeasuring Ac.0.11 gts. in Sy.No.
The court quashed proceedings against the accused under Sections 406 and 420 IPC, determining that the allegations lacked essential elements required for prosecution.
Offence of cheating - Quash of criminal complaint - There is no fraudulent or dishonest inducement of a person induced to deliver any property to any person again same is not the case her – Court not....
The court quashed the FIR against the petitioner as there was no direct transaction linking him to the complainant's claims, thus highlighting the importance of substantiating allegations with factua....
The court held that mere breach of contract does not constitute a criminal offence of cheating or criminal breach of trust, emphasizing the necessity of fraudulent intent from inception.
Criminal liability under IPC requires clear evidence of intentional wrongdoing, which was absent; thereby, genuine civil disputes cannot sustain criminal charges.
The court held that mere non-payment of dues in a commercial transaction does not constitute criminal offences under IPC Sections 406 and 420, emphasizing the distinction between civil and criminal l....
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
