The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No. 1919 of 2023 1. M/s Deepak Enterpreneurs Pvt. Ltd. through it’s Director – Deepak Kumar Agrawal, s/o Suraj Mal Agarwal, aged about 44 years, r/o 4th Floor, Swasti, Jalan Road, Upper Bazar, P.O.-G.P.O., P.S.- Kotwali, Dist.-Ranchi 2. Amit Kumar Agarwal, s/o Suraj Mal Agarwal, aged about 38 years, r/o 32, 3rd Floor, Pushpanjali, Lake Road, P.O.-G.P.O., P.S.-Kotwali, Dist.-Ranchi 3. Payal Agrawal, w/o Deepak Kumar Agrawal, aged about 40 years, Director (Ex), r/o 4th Floor, Swasti, Jalan Road, Upper Bazar, P.O.- G.P.O., P.S.-Kotwali, Dist.-Ranchi .... Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Siddarth Sharma, s/o Sushil Kumar Sharma, r/o Mansarovar, House No.7, Old Commissioners Compound, Upper Bazar, P.O.- G.P.O., P.S.-Kotwali, Dist.-Ranchi …. Opp. Parties P R E S E N T
Legal Reasoning
It is well settled that every breach of contract would not give rise to an offence of cheating and only in those cases breach of contract would amount to cheating where there was any deception played at the very inception. If the intention to cheat has developed later on, the same cannot amount to cheating. In the present case it has nowhere been stated that at the very inception there was any intention on behalf of the accused persons to cheat which is a condition precedent for an offence under Section 420 IPC.” (Emphasis supplied) that unless the accused person of a case has played deception since the beginning of the transaction between the parties, the Cr.M.P. No.1919 of 2023 3 offence punishable under Section 420 of Indian Penal Code will not be made out. 8. Now after going through the entire materials in the record, this Court finds that there is no allegation against the petitioners of playing deception since the beginning of the transaction between the parties. The only allegation against the petitioners is that the construction of the apartment was going on at a slow pace but the undisputed fact remains that more than the amount taken by the petitioners has already been repaid to the father of the complainant. 9. In the absence of essential ingredients to constitute the offence punishable under Section 420 of Indian Penal Code i.e. playing deception since the beginning of the transaction between the parties, this Court is of the considered view that even if the entire allegation are considered to be true in its entirety, still, the offence punishable under Section 420 of Indian Penal Code is not made out. Therefore, continuation of the criminal proceeding against the petitioners will amount to abuse of process of law and this is a fit case where the entire criminal proceeding of Complaint Case No. 1491 of 2017 including the order taking cognizance dated 23.12.2017 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi be quashed and set aside. 10. Accordingly, the entire criminal proceeding of Complaint Case No. 1491 of 2017 including the order taking cognizance dated 23.12.2017 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi is quashed and set aside. Cr.M.P. No.1919 of 2023 4 11.
Arguments
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ….. For the Petitioners For the State For O.P. No.2 : Mr. Jitendra Singh, Advocate : Ms. Rishi Bharti, Advocate : Ms. Priyasha Priyadarshani, Advocate : Mr. Rakesh Ranjan, Addl. P.P. : Mr. Anurag Kashyap, 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 entire criminal proceeding of Complaint Case No. Cr.M.P. No.1919 of 2023 1 1491 of 2017 including the order taking cognizance dated 23.12.2017 by which the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi has taken cognizance of the offence punishable under Section 420 of Indian Penal Code against the petitioners. 3. The allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioner no.1 is a company of which the petitioner nos.2 and 3 are directors and they entered into an agreement with the father of the complainant to sell a flat and received at the first instance Rs.16,70,000/- and subsequently, Rs.10,00,000/- thus, in total Rs.26,70,000/- they received but did not either return the money nor allotted the flat. 4. On the basis of the complaint, statement on solemn affirmation of the complainant and the statement of the inquiry witnesses, the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi found prima facie case for the offence punishable under Section 420 of Indian Penal Code against the petitioners. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners by drawing attention of this Court to page nos.24-25 of the brief which is the copy of the cheques submits that Rs.28,00,000/- has been paid by the petitioner no.2 to the father of the complainant which goes to show that there is no allegation against the petitioners of having played deception since the beginning of the transaction between the parties which is a sine-qua-non for the commission of an offence punishable under Section 420 of Indian Penal Code. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that even if the allegation made against the petitioners are considered to be true in its entirety still the offence punishable under Section Cr.M.P. No.1919 of 2023 2 420 of Indian Penal Code is not made out. Hence, it is submitted that the prayer as made in this criminal miscellaneous petition be allowed. 6. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 fairly submit that the opposite party no.2 has already been paid Rs.28,00,000/- albeit after institution of the complaint but submits that the same will not condone the offence committed by the petitioners. Hence, it is submitted that this criminal miscellaneous petition being without any merit be dismissed. 7. Having heard the submissions made at the Bar and after carefully going through the materials in the record, it is pertinent to mention here that it is a settled principle of law as has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Uma Shankar Gopalika vs. State of Bihar & Anr. reported in (2005) 10 SCC 336, paragraph no. 6 of which reads as under :- “6. Xxxx xxxx xxxx
Decision
In the result, this criminal miscellaneous petition is allowed. High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi Dated the 19th December, 2024 AFR/Sonu-Gunjan/- (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Cr.M.P. No.1919 of 2023 5