1. Darshan Singh, aged about 66 years, Son of Late Sardar Singh, Resident of v. 1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. Kamaljeet Singh Sahgal, aged about 65 years, Son
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No. 731 of 2023 1. Darshan Singh, aged about 66 years, Son of Late Sardar Singh, Resident of Kaushal Puri, 118/241, Hanuman Park Lane, P.O. & P.S. – Najirabad, District –Kanpur (Uttar Pradesh). 2. Gurudeep Singh, aged about 45 years, son of Darshan Singh, Resident of Kaushal Puri, 118/241, Hanuman Park Lane, P.O. & P.S. – Najirabad, District –Kanpur (Uttar Pradesh). .... Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. Kamaljeet Singh Sahgal, aged about 65 years, Son of Late Pritam Singh, Resident of Flat No. 185, Phase -5, Aadarsh Nagar, P.O. & P.S. –Sonari, Jamshedpur, District –East Singhbhum, Permanent Resident of 7/72A, Flat No. 9, Shipra Apartment, Tilak Nagar, P.O. & P.S. –Tilak Nagar, District –Kanpur (Uttar Pradesh). …. Opp. Parties P R E S E N T
Legal Reasoning
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ….. For the Petitioner For the State For the O.P. No.2 : Mr. B.M. Tripathi, Sr. Advocate : Mr. Shashank Shekhar Prasad, Advocate : Ms. Richa Mishra, Advocate : Mr. Manoj Kr. Mishra, Addl. P.P. : Mr. Indrajit Sinha, Advocate : Mr. Sagar Kumar, Advocate ….. By the Court:- 1. 2. Heard the parties. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with a prayer to quash the order dated 23.01.2023, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate -1st Class, Jamshedpur in Protest-cum-Complaint Case No. 3765 of 2022 whereby and where under the learned Judicial 1 Cr.M.P. No.731 of 2023 Magistrate -1st Class has taken cognizance for the offence punishable under Section 417 of the Indian Penal Code and also to quash the entire criminal proceeding of the said Protest-cum- Complaint Case No. 3765 of 2022. 3. The brief facts of the case is that the complainant took a loan of Rs.10,00,000/- from the petitioners and admittedly he submitted some blank papers after putting signatures upon the same and handed over six cheques in which the amount was not written, at the time of taking such loan. The complainant claims to have returned the entire money but the allegation is that the petitioners even after receipt of the entire money lent by them, have used the cheque issued by the complainant-opposite party no.2 for realization of the cheque amount and upon dishonour of the cheques, have instituted case against the complainant. The complainant filed Complaint Case No. 1184 of 2021 in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur, East Singhbhum. The same was referred to police under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. and police after investigation of the case submitted final form and did not send up the petitioners for trial by mentioning that the dispute between the parties is a civil dispute. The complainant filed a protest petition and on the basis of the statement in the protest- cum-complaint petition, statement under solemn affirmation of the complainant and the statement of the inquiry witnesses, the learned Magistrate has found sufficient ground to proceed with 2 Cr.M.P. No.731 of 2023 the case for the offence punishable under Section 417 of the Indian Penal Code and issued summons upon the petitioners. 4. It is submitted by the learned senior counsel for the petitioners that admittedly the complainant took friendly loan from the petitioners. It is then submitted that in fact, the complainant took friendly loan of Rs.19,00,000/- from the petitioners out of which Rs.10,00,000/- were taken through RTGS and Rs.9,00,000/- were taken through cash and for taking the loan the opposite party no.2 executed promissory note in favour of the petitioners and son of the opposite party no.2 namely Simar Pal Singh executed guarantee notes and became guarantor in favour of the petitioners. The copy of the promissory note has been annexed as annexure-4 of this criminal miscellaneous petition. It is then submitted that as after expiry of the stipulated time, the opposite party no.2 did not return the amount, the petitioners presented two cheques to the bank, one for Rs.8,00,000/- and the other for Rs.1,44,500/-. Both the cheques were dishonoured because of insufficient funds in the concerned bank account. On demand of the cheque amount, the opposite party no.2 refused to return the amount. The petitioners filed Complaint Case before the Metropolitan Magistrate at Kanpur and to set up a defence in the said case, this false case has been instituted by the opposite party no.2. It is then submitted that thus this case has been instituted for wrecking vengeance. It is then submitted that even though, the entire allegations made against the petitioners are considered to 3 Cr.M.P. No.731 of 2023 be true in their entirety, still the offence punishable under Section 417 of the Indian Penal Code is not made out against the petitioners. Hence, it is submitted that the prayer as made by the petitioners in this criminal miscellaneous petition be allowed. 5. The learned Addl. P.P. and the learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer for quashing the order dated 23.01.2023, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate -1st Class, Jamshedpur in Protest-cum- Complaint Case No. 3765 of 2022 and the entire criminal proceeding of the said Protest-cum-Complaint Case No. 3765 of 2022 and submits that the allegations made in the Protest-cum- Complaint Petition and the Statement under solemn affirmation of the complainant-opposite party no.2 and the statement of the two inquiry witnesses is sufficient to constitute the offence punishable under Section 417 of the Indian Penal Code. Hence, it is submitted that this criminal miscellaneous petition being without any merit be dismissed. 6. Having heard the submissions made at the Bar and after going through the materials in the record, it is pertinent to mention here that the essential ingredients of the offence punishable under Section 417 of the Indian Penal Code are as follows:- (i) The accused voluntarily and dishonestly induced the complainant. (ii) He did so for delivery of the property either to the accused or some other person. 4 Cr.M.P. No.731 of 2023 7. 8. (iii) He intentionally induced the complainant to do a thing which he would not do or omit to do –a thing which he would have done; if not induced. (iv) Such act caused was likely to cause some damage or harm to his body, mind, reputation or property. It is needless to mention that the first and foremost ingredient of the offence punishable under Section 417 of the Indian Penal Code is that the victim must have been deceived. Now coming to the facts of the case, the complainant-opposite party no.2 voluntarily handed over the cheques signed by him, keeping the amount blank. So under such circumstances, it cannot be said that the petitioners have deceived the complainant. There is no allegation of any deception led by the petitioners. In the absence of any deception since the beginning of the transaction between the parties, it is a settled principle of law that the offence punishable under Section 417 of the Indian Penal Code cannot be made out. Therefore, even if the allegations made against the petitioners are considered to be true in their entirety, still the offence punishable under Section 417 of the Indian Penal Code is not made out. 9. Hence, in the considered opinion of this Court, continuation of this criminal proceeding will amount to abuse of process of law and this is a fit case where the order dated 23.01.2023, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate -1st Class, Jamshedpur in Protest- cum-Complaint Case No. 3765 of 2022 and the entire criminal 5 Cr.M.P. No.731 of 2023 proceeding of the said Protest-cum-Complaint Case No. 3765 of 2022 be quashed and set aside. 10. Accordingly, the order dated 23.01.2023, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate -1st Class, Jamshedpur in Protest-cum- Complaint Case No. 3765 of 2022 and the entire criminal proceeding of the said Protest-cum-Complaint Case No. 3765 of 2022 is quashed and set aside. 11.
Decision
In the result, this criminal miscellaneous petition is allowed. High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi Dated the 24th June, 2024 AFR/Sonu-Gunjan/- (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 6 Cr.M.P. No.731 of 2023