High Court · 2025

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash the proceedings against the Petitioner/Accused No.3 in C.C.No.2483/2022 pending on the file of the lll Addl. Junior Civil Judge cum X Addl. Metropolitan lvlagistrate, Ivledchal at Athivelli in the interest of justice; l.A. NO: 1OF 2023 Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition,the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings, including the appearance of the Petitioner/Accused No.3 in C.C.No.2483/ 2022 pendiog on the file of the IllAddl. Junior Civil Judge cum X Addl. It/etropolitan l\ilagistrate, tvledchal at Athivelli; This Petition coming on for hearing,upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri MOHD MUZAFFER ULLAH KHAN ,Advocate for the Petitioner and Sri E.Ganesh, Asst. Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No. 1 and Sri P. Vamsheedhar Reddy, Advocate for the Respondent No.2; The Court made the following: ORDER -i. .t THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL CRIMINAL PETITION No.1O449 OF 20.23 ORDER: This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Crimina-l Procedure, 1973 (for short the Cr.P.C.) by the petitioner/accused No.3 to quash the proceedings against him in C.C.No.2483 of 2022, pending on the hle of learned II Additional Junior Civil Judge-Cum-X Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Medcha-l at Athivelli, for offences punishable under Sections 406, 42O of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, 'the IPCJ.

2. The case of the prosecution complainant/respondent No.2 lodged IS a that de-facto complaint

18.10.2022 against the petitioner/accused No.3 and other accused persons stating that in the month of October, 2020 he carne to know through a mediator namely Ravi Kumar that one school by name 'Kothwal School'is for sale. Thereafter, accused No.2 who is the treasurer of the school came to the offrce of the mediator Ravi Kumar and offered to sell the schoo[-f6? a consideration of Rs.1,4S,0O,OO0/- for which the \ i 2 EYYJ CRLP 10119 2023 de-facto complainant agreed and gave an advance of Rs. 1,00,000/-. It is further stated in the complaint that on

12.1O.2O2O, the de-facto complainant gave a sum of Rs. 1O,00,0001- to accused No.2 and executed an agreement for the sale of the school. Subsequently, the de-facto complainant had paid various sums on varlous occaslons total.ing to Rs.39,95,OOO/- to the accused Nos.1 and 2 wit}: regard to the agreement between them. Later on, the accused Nos. 1 and 2 l:ad sold the school to the petitioner/accused No.3 of Orchid School and upon questioning by the de-facto complainant, the accused Nos. L and 2 returned an amount of Rs.2,50,00O/- and promised to pay the pending amount. Due to non payment of the pending amount to the respondent he approached the Police and lodged a complaint.

3. Heard Sri Mohd. Muzaferullah Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Sri E.Ganesh, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the respondent State and Sri P. Vamshedhar Reddy, learned counsel for the respondent No.2. w 3 EtnaJ CRLP 10119 2023

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that since it is not the case of the prosecution that the petitioner fraudulently or dishonestly induced the de-facto complainant to deliver any property, or intentionally persuaded the de-facto complainant to do or omit to do something, the ingredients of the offence under Sections 406 and 42O of lpC are not established. In support of his submission, he placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Deepak Ga.bd and Others as. State of tlttar Prq.desh and Anothert and prayed the Court to allow the Criminal Petition.

5. On the other hand, learned Assistant public prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner stating that since the charge sheet was filed after completion of the investigation, a detailed trial has to be conducted in order to elicit the true facts of the case and as such, interference of this Court, at this stag€, rs not warralted. Hence, he prayed the Court to dismiss the Criminal Petition. I QO23 Liue I+Ett (SC) 3) 1_ EYV,;' CRLP 10449 202r

6. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 stated that there are serious allegations against the petitioner and prayed the Court to dismiss the Criminal Petition.

7. ln Deepak Gabc (Supra), the Apex Court at paragraph Nos.13 and 16 highlighted the requisite ingredients to attract the offence under Sections 406 and 42O of IPC, as outlined in this very recent judgment, which is extracted as under: "13. Section 4OO of the IPC prescibes punishment for breach for trust uthich mag extend to three aears or uith fine or uith both, uhen ingredients of Section 405 of the IPC are satisfied. For Section 406 of the IPC to get attracted, there must be ciminal breach of trust in term-s of Section 405 of the IPC or Section 4O5 of the IPC to be attracted, the follouing haue to be established: (a)The occused was entrusted uith propertg, or entrusted with dominion ouer propertg; (b) The accused had dis-honestlg misappropriated or conuerted to their oun use that propertg, or dishonestlg used or disposed of that propertg or uilfullg suffer ang otherpersonto do so; and (c) Such misappropriation, conuersion, use or disposal should be in uiolation of ang direction of lana prescibing the mode in ulhich such tt'ttst is to be discharged, or of ang legal contract which the person has mede, touching the discharge of suchtrust. 5 Et4al CRLP 10449 2023 (14) Thus, ciminal breach of trust uould, inter alia, mean using or disposing of the propertg bg a person uho is entrusted uith or othenlise had dominion. Such an act must not onlg be done dishonestlg, but also in uiolation of ang direction of lgu or anA contract express or implied relating to carrging out lhe trusl.

16. In order to applg Section 42O of the IPC, namelg cheating and dishonestlg inducing deliuery of propertg, the ingredients of Section 415 of the IPC haue to be satisfied. To constitute an offence of cheating under Section 415 of the IPC, a person should be induced, either fraudulentlg or dishonestlg, to deliuery ang propertg to ang person, or consent that ang person shall retain any propertg. The second class o/ acts forth in the Section is the intentional inducement of doing or omitting to do angthing uhich the person deceiued uould not do or omit to do, if she utere not so deceiued. Thus, the sine quie non of Section 415 of the IPC is 'fraudulence', "dishonestg". Or "intentional inducement", and the absence of these elements uould debase the offence of cheating". { I

8. A plain reading of the above makes it crystal clear that in order to attract offence under Sections 406 and 42O of ttre IPC, there must be inducement either fraudulently or dishonesfly to deliver any property to any person. 6 EW,l CRLP t0119 2023 g. With the aforesaid touchstone, in the instant case, it is apparent that the petitioner has not played any fraudulent act in order to sell the schedule school premises. Hence, this Court, having respectable agreement with the views taken by the Apex Court in the aforesaid judgment, is of the considered opinion that alleged offences do not attract to the case on hand hence the proceedings against the petitioner are liable to be quashed.

10. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is a'llowed and the proceedings against the petitioner in C.C.No.2483 of 2022, pending on the hle of learned II Additional Junior Civil Judge- Cum-X Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Medchal at Athivelli, are hereby quashed. Miscellaneous applications, if aly pending, shall also starld Slassd. //TRUE COPY// Sd/. MOHD. ISMAIL DEPUTY REGISTRAR ,i : SECT/Cfl{ OFFICER To, Medchal at Athivelli

1. The lll Addl. Junior Civil Judge -cum-X Addl lriletropolitan Magistrate' z. in" strtion House officer, Alwal p.s., cyberabad commissionerate i. o"" dc i" sni uouo rt'iuzniien ULLAH KHAN Advocate [oPUC] ;. o;; aa io sCr. p.vnrusHEEDHAR REDDY Advocate toPUCl ;. i;;;d;i" PueLiCFRos?Zuion' Hisn court at Hvderabad (oUr) 6. Two CD Copies VSM,&am HIGH COURT DATED:0710412025 1l L4 (/) laJ o ' 't, oas 7 * o ]j' r Jll \- +c \ t\ t;' t,' ,,,,/ - '.:---=' ORDER CRLP.No.10449 of 2023 ALLOWING THE CRIM!NAL PETITION /o /zs r/ -1