V.Y. JOSE & ANR. versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

V.Y. JOSE & ANR. versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

Absence of averments in the complaint petition showing culpable intent at the inception of contract and lack of facts constituting the offence of cheating under s.420 IPC justify quashing of criminal proceedings under s.482 CrPC; mere breach of contract does not amount to cheating.

Parties
Appellant: V.Y. Jose; Respondent: State of Gujarat; Appellant: Premionics (the firm); Respondent: Partnership firm (Complianant/Respondent No.2)
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
16 December 2008
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against High Court Dismissal of Application for Quashing Under S.482 Cr PC
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judgment of the High Court set aside; criminal proceedings against the appellants quashed.
Legal Topics
Quashing of Proceedings, Cheating Under S.420 IPC, Distinction Between Breach of Contract and Cheating, Scope of S.482 Cr PC
Criminal Law Contract Law Quashing of Proceedings Cheating Under S.420 IPC Distinction Between Breach of Contract and Cheating Scope of S.482 Cr PC

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

V.Y. Jose

Appellant

State of Gujarat

Respondent

Premionics (the firm)

Appellant

Partnership firm (Complianant/Respondent No.2)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against High Court Dismissal of Application for Quashing Under S.482 Cr PC

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether absence of averments showing fraudulent or dishonest intention at time of making promise in the complaint supports criminal prosecution for cheating under s.420 IPC.
  2. 2 Whether the proceedings should be quashed under s.482 CrPC as a mere breach of contract does not constitute cheating.

Ratio Decidendi

Absence of averments in the complaint petition showing culpable intent at the inception of contract and lack of facts constituting the offence of cheating under s.420 IPC justify quashing of criminal proceedings under s.482 CrPC; mere breach of contract does not amount to cheating.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judgment of the High Court set aside; criminal proceedings against the appellants quashed.

Orders

  • Criminal proceedings against the appellants are quashed.