Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 15 (0.34 seconds)
Karam Chand Thaper vs T.G. Vasanth Gupta on 1 July, 2002 cites

State Of Kerala vs A. Pareed Pillai And Anr. on 28 April, 1972

In support of his contention, he relied upon the decision in State of Kerala v. A.P. Pillai (A.I.R. 1973, Supreme Court 326), wherein it was held that, "To hold a person guilty of the offences of cheating, it has to be shown that his intention was dishonest at the time of making the promise. Such a dishonest intention cannot be inferred from the mere fact that he could not subsequently fulfil the promise."
Supreme Court of India Cites 11 - Cited by 123 - H R Khanna - Full Document

Hridaya Rangan Pd. Verma And Ors vs State Of Bihar And Anr on 31 March, 2000

Therefore, the counsel submitted that the mere fact that M/s. Sree Royalaseema Paper Mills could not fulfil the promise by itself does not amount to an offence of cheating, punishable under Section 420 I.P. C. Further, the learned counsel relies upon a decision in Hridaya Ranjan Pd. Verma & Others v. State of Bihar & Another (2000 (2) Crimes 72 (SC), where the Supreme Court has held, " 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,.....it is necessary to show that he had fraudulent or dishonest intention at the time of making the promise. "
Supreme Court of India Cites 18 - Cited by 714 - D P Mohapatra - Full Document
1   2 Next