Criminal liability cannot exist for actions that are fundamentally civil disputes unless accompanied by clear criminal intent.

1. The instant revisional application has been filed for quashing of the impugned proceedings being Charge-Sheet No. 382 of 2012 dated 31.10.2012 under Sections 403 /406/417/442/34 of the Indian Penal Code arising out of Malipanchghara Police Station Case No. 286 of 2012 dated 21.08.2012 under Sections 403 /406/417/442/34 of the Indian Penal Code pending before Learned Judicial Magistrate, 5th Court, Howrah being G.R. Case No. 5555 of 2012. 2. Petitioners stated that one Sukhendu Ghosh a tenant at premises no. 9 Akshay Kumar Chatterjee Lane filed an application under Section 156 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure before the Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Howrah inter alia stating the petitioner no. 1 to 3 to be the partners of Partnership firm namely “Balaji Realtors” and petitioner 1 and 3 entered into an agreement with petitioner no. 2 and 4 for development and construction of building at premises no. 9 Akshay Kumar Chatterjee Lane. Petitioner No. 1 and 2 entered into an oral agreement for sale of proposed Flat measuring with 550 sq. ft. at consideration of Rs.1040/- per square feet, amounting to a sum of Rs.5,72,000/-. Rs. 1,55,001/- was paid in advance to petitioner no. 1 and 2 and in spite of request of the Subhendu Ghosh, the petitioner no. 1 and 3 did not execute the agreement for sale of the said flat and the petitioners accepted the advance sum of money without entering into an agreement for sale which had been admitted in the written objection filed by the petitioner in another Suit no. 6 of 2012 arising out of an application under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act , pending before the Learned Additional District Judge, 2nd Court, Howrah. Finally petitioner no. 1 and 3 forwarded a copy of the draft agreement wherein the consideration for sale was mentioned as Rs.1200/- per square feet and requested the complainant to finalise the same and despite several requests the petitioners did not execute the agreement for sale and virtually given possession to the complainant who made necessary alteration to the fixtures and fitting as per his requirement by incurring expenses of Rs.30,000/- in the year 2010 but in the year 2011 the maternal uncle of the complainant who booked a flat in the said building could not avail Bank Loan to pay balance consideration to petitioner no. 1 and 3 as the petitioner no. 1 & 3 could not provide proper documents including completion certificate. The maternal uncle of the complainant had purchased the requisite stamp papers for registration of the flat. The validity of the said stamp papers was to expire and the petitioners approached the complainant and requested him to transfer the amount to the account of maternal uncle of the complainant so that the conveyance deed for the flat of maternal uncle of the complainant could be executed and registered and represented to the complainant that his booking shall remain and he can pay the booking amount to them in two three months time and in good faith the complainant agreed to the proposal and consented to transfer the advance money paid by him in favour of his maternal uncle and after execution and registration of the flat the maternal uncle of the complainant repaid the complainant the sum of Rs.1,55,000/- so that complainant could pay the same to petitioner no. 1 and 3 the said sum but they refused to accept the same and the complainant came to learn that the petitioners had entered into an agreement with another person and the petitioner no. 1 and 3 had misrepresented the complainant and had cheated him