Back
HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Honourable Dr Justice G. JAYACHANDRAN
R.SENTHILVEL – Appellant
Versus
THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE – Respondent
Cheating - Contract Carriage Permit - IPC 420 - The court examined the elements of cheating in the context of inadvertent number plate exchange and held that lack of intent negated the application of IPC 420.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, owner of two vehicles, had them inadvertently interchanged at a mechanic's workshop. One vehicle was seized due to differences in registration number and engine number, leading to a complaint under IPC Section 420.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner did not possess malicious intent to deceive or cheat, establishing that the registration error resulted from a simple mistake, hence the FIR could be quashed.
Issues: Whether the unintentional act of plying a vehicle with an incorrect registration number amounts to the offense of cheating under IPC Section 420.
Ratio Decidendi: The court decided that without intent to cheat or deceive, the petitioner could not be charged under IPC Section 420, as intent is a critical element of the offense.
Final Decision: The FIR was quashed, and the vehicle was ordered to be returned to the petitioner.
O R D E R
The petitioner is the owner of tour buses and holder of contract carriage of permit issued by the State Transport Authority. His vehicle bearing Regn.No.PY-01-CF-6099 was intercepted by the defacto complainant and found that there is difference in the registration number, engine number when compared with RC Book. Therefore, the vehicle was seized.
2. According to the petitioner, he has two vehicles, one bearing Regn.No. PY-01-CG-5099 and another bearing Regn.No.PY-01-CF- 6099. Both the vehicles were sent to mechanic shop for mending fault. At that time, the Mechanic by inadvertence has changed the number plates. Due to the exchange of number plates, when the vehicle was intercepted and checked, there was variance in the registration number and engine number. The vehicle after being seized by the police, the petitioner has filed the writ petition seeking mandamus, to release his vehicle bearing Regn.No.PY-01-CG-5099.
3. This Court vide order dated 06.02.2023 has directed the second respondent/ The Regional Transport, Thiruppur South, to release the petitioner's vehicle bearing PY-01-CG-5099, but, wrongly carrying the registration number (Regn.No.PY-01-CF-6099). However, the second respondent by that time has handed over the vehicle to the police and the police has registered the FIR in Cr.No.69 of 2023 on 11.02.2023. The vehicle is now been produced before the Court as a ' case property'. 4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police on getting instructions from the Investigating Officer submits that since the vehicle of the petitioner was carrying a wrong registration number, the police has registered the case on the complaint given by the Motor Vehicle Inspector for the offence under Section 420 IPC in Cr.No.69 of 2023. The said vehicle was produced before the learned Judicial Magistrate on 21.03.2023 and assigned P.R.No.39 of 2023. Since there is no space to park the vehicle in the court premises, it has been handed over to the Regional Transport Office, Kangeyam and it is presently parked in the Regional Transport Office, Kangeyam.
5. The petitioner herein being aggrieved by the factum of registering the complaint under Section 420 of IPC.
6. When there is no intention of filing petition to quash the complaint, this Court on perusing the record finds that the petitioner herein is owner of two buses, one bearing Regn.No. PY-01-CG-5099 and another bearing Regn.No.PY-01-CF-6099. Admittedly, the vehicle bearing Regn.No. PY-01-CG-5099 with wrong number plate bearing Regn.No.PY-01-CF-6099 was plying and therefore, the same was intercepted and seized. Whether this act will attract the offence under Section 420 of IPC is the matter for consideration. of reads as below:
“420.Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property:- Whoever cheats and thereby dishonestly induces the person deceived to deliver any property to any person, or to make, alter or destroy the whole or any part of a valuable security, or anything which is signed or sealed, and which is capable of being converted into a valuable security, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine”.
7. In this case apparently, the petitioner had no intention of cheating any person or had an intention of deceiving any person. He had vehicle with Regn.No. PY-01-CG-5099 and PY-01-CF-6099. The reason for exchange of the number plate been explained and the explanation is possible.
8. This Court on different occasion has considered the fact and has directed the Regional Transport Officer to release the petitioner's vehicle. However, this order has not implemented by the Regional Transport Officer stating police has registered the FIR and taken cognizance of the offence. The offence of cheating is taken cognizance by the respondent police is based on the complaint given by Regional Transport Officer.
9. The tenor of the complaint reveals that while inspec
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
