Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 19 (0.28 seconds)Section 405 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 506 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 406 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 504 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 34 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Ajay Mitra vs State Of M.P. & Ors on 28 January, 2003
10. The High Court, therefore, should have posed a
question as to whether any act of inducement on the part
of the appellant has been raised by the second respondent
and whether the appellant had an intention to cheat him
from the very inception. If the dispute between the parties
was essentially a civil dispute resulting from a breach of
contract on the part of the appellants by non-refunding
the amount of advance the same would not constitute an
offence of cheating. Similar is the legal position in respect
of an offence of criminal breach of trust having regard to
its definition contained in Section 405 of the Penal Code.
(See Ajay Mitra v. State of M.P. [(2003) 3 SCC 11 : 2003
SCC (Cri) 703] )"
Vijay Kumar Ghai vs The State Of West Bengal on 22 March, 2022
9. Learned counsel for the petitioners next relied upon the
judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Vijay
Kumar Ghai v. State of W.B. reported in (2022) 7 SCC 124,
paragraph nos. 28 and 38 of which reads as under:-
Hridaya Ranjan Prasad Verma & vs Akhil Ranjan Prasad Verma & Or on 29 June, 2011
38. There can be no doubt that a mere breach of contract
is not in itself a criminal offence and gives rise to the civil
liability of damages. However, as held by this Court in
Hridaya Ranjan Prasad Verma v. State of Bihar [Hridaya
Ranjan Prasad Verma v. State of Bihar, (2000) 4 SCC
168 : 2000 SCC (Cri) 786] , the distinction between mere
breach of contract and cheating, which is criminal offence,
is a fine one. While breach of contract cannot give rise to
criminal prosecution for cheating, fraudulent or dishonest
intention is the basis of the offence of cheating. In the case
at hand, complaint filed by Respondent 2 does not
disclose dishonest or fraudulent intention of the
appellants."
M/S Thermax Ltd.& Ors vs K.M.Johny & Ors on 27 September, 2011
10. Relying upon the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India
in the case of Thermax Ltd. v. K.M. Johny reported in (2011) 13
SCC 412, paragraph no.39 of which reads as under:-