Whether breach of
contract of an agreement for sale would constitute an offence under section 406
or 420 of the Indian Penal Code.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Dalip Kaur and Ors. Vs. Jagnar Singh and Anr., observed that, if the dispute between the parties is a
civil dispute resulting from a breach of contract by non-refunding the amount
of advance then same would not constitute an offence of cheating.
The High Court would exercise its
inherent jurisdiction only when one or the other propositions of law, as laid
down in R. Kalyani Vs. Janak C. Mehta and Ors., is attracted, which are as under:
(1) The High Court ordinarily would not exercise its
inherent jurisdiction to quash a criminal proceeding and, in particular, a
First Information Report unless the allegations contained therein, even if
given face value and taken to be correct in their entirety, disclosed no
cognizable offence.
(2) For the said purpose, the Court, save and except in
very exceptional circumstances, would not look to any document relied upon by
the defence.
(3) Such a power should be exercised very sparingly. If
the allegations made in the FIR disclose commission of an offence, the court
shall not go beyond the same and pass an order in favour of the accused to hold
absence of any mens rea or actus reus.
(4) If the allegation discloses a civil dispute, the
same by itself may not be a ground to hold that the criminal proceedings should
not be allowed to continue
Prepared by: S. Hemanth
