##PAGE1##

2025:UHC:11452

HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

Criminal Misc. Application U/s 482 No. 1030 of 2023

22 December, 2025

Swati Vaish & another

--Applicants

Versus

State Of Uttarakhand & another

--Respondents

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Presence:-

Mr. Lalit Sharma, learned counsel for the applicants.

Mr. S.C. Dumka, learned AGA for the State.

Mr. Lalit Miglani, learned counsel for respondent no.2.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J. (Oral)

By means of present C482 application,

applicant has put to challenge the Charge-sheet dated

29.01.2023; cognizance and summoning order dated

17.02.2023 as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal

State vs. Swati Vaish & another

Case No.1163 of 2023, ,

under Sections 120-B, 420 & 506 IPC, pending in the

court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun.

2. The brief facts of the case are that respondent

No. 2 lodged an FIR on 15.11.2020 against the applicant,

alleging that an agreement dated 09.01.2019 was

executed by applicant no. 1 in favour of respondent no. 2

for the shop in question for a sale consideration of Rs.90

lakhs. As per Condition No.2 of the said agreement, the

applicant was required to raise four pillars at the four

corners of the two shops and to construct a three-storey

building above the shop in question, thereafter selling

two shops to the respondent no.2. It is further alleged in

the FIR that respondent no.2 paid a sum of

1

2025:UHC:11452

Rs.15,50,000/-to the applicant no.1; however, the

applicant no.1 failed to raise construction over the

property in question. It is also alleged that the applicant

no.1 failed to perform her part of the contract and

committed fraud with respondent no.2 and also

threatened him.

3. After lodging of the first information report, the

Investigating Officer submitted the charge-sheet on

29.01.2023. Thereafter, learned Chief Judicial

Magistrate, Dehradun took cognizance on the said

charge-sheet and summoned the applicants to face the

trial under Sections 420, 506 & 120-B IPC on

17.02.2023.

4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits

that the dispute is purely civil in nature and has been

given a colour of criminality by respondent no. 2 solely to

harass the applicants. He further submits that, for the

purpose of establishing the offence of cheating, the

complainant is required to show that the accused had

fraudulent or dishonest intention at the time of making

the promise or representation. However, in the present

case, neither has it been alleged that the intention of the

applicant no.1 at the time of entering into the agreement

to sell was dishonest, nor is such intention evident from

the facts and circumstances of the case. Rather, it is

conversely apparent that the intention of the applicant

no.1 at the time of entering into the agreement to sell was

completely honest, as part of the said agreement was

even performed. Thus, the subsequent breach of the

agreement to sell does not constitute an offence under

Section 420 IPC.

2

2025:UHC:11452

5. Respondent No. 2 has filed his counter

affidavit. In the counter affidavit, it has been stated that

the applicants have engineered various documents,

including the copy of the agreement dated 09.01.2019 (at

page 20 of the application), wherein the receipt of Rs.

5,50,000/- in the handwriting of Respondent No. 2, along

with the signatures of the witnesses, has been wiped off

in the copy annexed to the application as well as in the

civil suit. It is further alleged that the applicants have

fabricated the legal notice dated 16.10.2020 and filed a

false civil case in order to mislead the authorities as well

as the court of law by presenting totally false facts and

concealing the actual ones.

6. It is further stated that the charge-sheet has

been submitted after considering every aspect of the

matter, and that the applicants have failed to point out

any illegality or infirmity in the impugned summoning

orders or in the impugned proceedings.

7. The appl