The intention of cheating must exist at the inception of transactions

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Criminal Appeal No. 2582 of 2024 (Arising out of SLP (Criminal) No. 8990 of 2019)

C. Subbiah @ Kadambur Jayaraj & Others…………Appellants

Vs.

The Superintendent of Police & Others…………Respondents

B.R. Gavai & Sandeep Mehta, JJ.

Indian Penal Code, 1860

Section 420 read with Section 120B, Section 294(b), 506(ii) read with Section 114—Cheating in real estate business—Quashing of proceedings declined by High Court—Appeal—Absence of allegation to hold that intention of accused appellants was to defraud the complainant right from the inception of transactions—Necessary ingredients of offences punishable under Section 406 and Section 420 IPC are not made out against accused appellants from admitted allegations set out in the complaint and charge sheet—It cannot be doubted that a dispute which is purely civil in nature has been given a colour of criminal prosecution alleging fraud and criminal breach of trust by misusing tool of criminal law—Complainant alleged that accused abused him by using profane language—Section 294(b) IPC would clearly not apply to such an act—Apart from a bald allegation made by complainant that first accused abused him and intimidated him, there is no material which can show that accused indulged in criminal intimidation of complainant so as to justify invocation of offence punishable under Section 506(ii) of IPC—Complainant has tried to misuse the tool of criminal law by filing the patently frivolous FIR, wherein allegation is levelled regarding so-called incident of criminal intimidation—Criminal prosecution instituted against accused appellants in pursuance of the totally frivolous FIR tantamounts to sheer abuse of the process of law—Impugned order passed by High Court is quashed—Appeal allowed.

Vanya Bajaj Advocate

Related Posts

Leave a Reply