Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
K. SUJANA
Rohit Kedia – Appellant
Versus
State of Telangana – Respondent
ORDER :
K. SUJANA, J.
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short ‘Cr.P.C.’) to quash the proceedings against the petitioner/accused in C.C.No.459 of 2022 on the file of IV-Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Medchal-Malkajgiri District at L.B.Nagar. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 420, 406 and 506 of Indian Penal Code (for short ‘I.P.C’).
2. The facts of the case are that on 01.02.2021 the 3rd respondent-defacto complainant lodged a report before the police stating that he is doing business in Rice Bran on commission basis. He used to take orders from factories and supply to traders. In the process the 3rd respondent got acquaintance with Rohit Kedia who is the Managing Director of Rohith Extractions Pvt. Ltd., at Narapally and office at Himayatnagar and supplying rice bran on commission basis. The 3rd respondent supplied rice bran from 09.11.2020 to 30.11.2020 from various traders to a tune of Rs.69,01,521/- under different invoices from different traders. The Rohith Extractions Pvt. Ltd., received the material and assured to make payments in one month from the date of invoices. On 30.11.2020 the
Allegations of non-payment do not constitute criminal offences unless there's evidence of dishonest intention or property entrustment.
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....
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....
Fraudulent intent at the inception of a transaction is essential to establish cheating; mere breach of contract does not constitute a criminal offence.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that every breach of contract does not give rise to an offence of cheating, and the intention to cheat must be present at the very inception. The j....
Non-payment in a commercial transaction does not constitute criminal breach of trust or cheating unless there is evidence of dishonest intention from the inception.
Criminal proceedings cannot be initiated for disputes that are purely civil, especially where the essential ingredients of the alleged offences are not met.
Mere non-payment for goods in a civil transaction cannot constitute cheating or criminal breach of trust under IPC; intent must be proven.
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
