Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
JUVVADI SRIDEVI
Vanga Sudheer Reddy – Appellant
Versus
State of Telangana – Respondent
ORDER :
1. This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (previously Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973) by the petitioners-accused Nos.1 to 3 seeking to quash the proceedings against them in Crime No.231 of 2024 of EOW Team VI, CCS, DD, Hyderabad, registered for the offences under Sections 403 , 406, 420 and 506 read with 120-B of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred as ‘ IPC ’).
2. Heard Mr. T.Pradyumna Kumar Reddy, learned Senior Counsel representing Mr. S.Ganesh, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. G.Ashok Reddy, learned counsel representing Mr. K.V.Rusheek Reddy, learned counsel for respondent No.2 and Mr. M.Ramachandra Reddy, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1-State. Perused the record.
3. Factual Matrix:
3.1. The de facto complainant, a designated partner in UBRS Housing and Infra Developers LLP and Bathala Housing and Infra Developers LLP, and also engaged in hotel and real estate businesses, sought to invest in land, in and around Hyderabad in 2019. 3.2. Through his relative namely RTV Prasad, the de facto complainant came into contact with petitioner-accused No.1, who is th
Fraudulent intent must be established for criminal liability in financial transactions, distinguishing between civil breaches of contract and criminal offenses like cheating.
Criminal liability for cheating requires proof of dishonest intent from inception, distinguishing breach of contract from criminal offence.
The absence of fraudulent intention at the inception of a transaction negates the offence of cheating, and civil disputes should not be converted into criminal prosecutions.
A mere commercial dispute, characterized by lack of initial dishonest intention, cannot constitute criminal offenses of cheating or breach of trust.
To establish cheating under IPC, fraudulent intent must exist at the inception of the transaction; mere breach of contract does not constitute a criminal offence.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the offence of cheating under Sections 415 and 420 of the IPC requires the presence of fraudulent or dishonest intention to induce delivery of....
The central legal point established in the judgment is that for an act to constitute an offence under Section 420 of the Penal Code, there must be fraudulent or dishonest inducement, and the absence ....
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
