Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + SC Indian Laws - 2021 (10) TMI SC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (10) TMI 1423 - SC - Indian LawsAlleged sale of flats in excess of the share agreed between the parties - breach of contract or constitutes an offence of cheating - necessary ingredients of offences punishable under Sections 406, 419 and 420 are prima facie made out or not - civil nature dispute or otherwise. Whether the necessary ingredients of offences punishable under Sections 406, 419 and 420 are prima facie made out? - HELD THAT:- Upon a careful assessment of such facts, by no stretch can it be concluded that the Appellants herein have deceptively or intentionally tried to sell excess flats if any, as contended by Respondent No. 2. Here, it must also be borne in mind that subsequent to the revocation of GPA, it was the Appellants herein who had first resorted to arbitration proceedings on 02.03.16 for redressal of dispute between the parties, to which Respondent No 2 had accordingly filed his statement of objections dated 09.03.16. It was only on 29.03.16 that Respondent No. 2 had filed the FIR in question bearing Crime No. 185/2016 against the Appellants. Moreover, it was Respondent No. 2 who had withdrawn his prayer with respect to selling of four excess flats by the Appellants, only to pursue the same in civil proceedings. In the instant case, the actual question which requires consideration is not whether a criminal case could be pursued in the presence of a civil suit, but whether the relevant ingredients for a criminal case are even prima facie made out. Relying on the facts, clearly no cogent case regarding a criminal breach of trust or cheating is made out - The dispute between the parties, could at best be termed as one involving a mere breach of contract. Whether sale of excess flats, even if made, amounts to a mere breach of contract or constitutes an offence of cheating? - HELD THAT:- This Court in the case of Hridaya Ranjan Prasad Verma & Ors. Vs. State of Bihar & Anr. [2000 (3) TMI 1105 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] has observed Mere breach of contract cannot give rise to criminal prosecution for cheating unless fraudulent or dishonest intention is shown right at the beginning of the transaction, that is the time when the offence is said to have been committed. Therefore it is the intention which is the gist of the offence. To hold a person guilty of cheating it is necessary to show that he had fraudulent or dishonest intention at the time of making the promise. Thus, where the key ingredient of having a dishonest or fraudulent intent under sections 405, 419 and 420 is not made out, the case at hand, in our considered opinion is a suitable case necessitating intervention of this Court. Whether the dispute is one of entirely civil nature and therefore liable to be quashed? - HELD THAT:- Existence of dishonest or fraudulent intention has not been made out against the Appellants. Though the instant dispute certainly involves determination of issues which are of civil nature, pursuant to which Respondent No. 2 has even instituted multiple civil suits, one can by no means stretch the dispute to an extent, so as to impart it a criminal colour. The High Court has erred in dismissing the petition filed by the Appellants under section 482 CrPC - the impugned order passed by the High Court of Karnataka is set aside - Appeal allowed.
|