Sections 419, 420, 323, 504 and 506 IPC,= Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash chargesheet = the ingredients to constitute an offence under Section 420 are as follows: i) a person must commit the offence of cheating under Section 415; and ii) the person cheated must be dishonestly induced to a) deliver property to any person; or b) make, alter or destroy valuable security or anything signed or sealed and capable of being converted into valuable security. Thus, cheating is an essential ingredient for an act to constitute an offence under Section 420 IPC. Cheating is defined under Section 415 of the IPC. The ingredients to constitute an offence of cheating are as follows: 4 i) there should be fraudulent or dishonest inducement of a person by deceiving him: The person who was induced should be intentionally induced to deliver any property to any person or to consent that any person shall retain any property, or the person who was induced should be intentionally induced to do or to omit to do anything which he would not do or omit if he were not so deceived. Thus, a fraudulent or dishonest inducement is an essential ingredient of the offence under Section 415 IPC. A person who dishonestly induced any person to deliver any property is liable for the offence of cheating. 6. Now, keeping in mind the relevant ingredients for the offences under Sections 419 & 420 IPC, as noted hereinabove, it is required to be considered whether the averments in the complaint taken on their face do constitute the ingredients necessary for the offences under Sections 419 & 420 IPC, as alleged. Having gone through the complaint/FIR and even the chargesheet, it cannot be said that the averments in the FIR and the allegations in the complaint against the appellant constitute an offence under Section 419 & 420 IPC. Whatever allegations are made for the offence with respect to inducement and/or even giving Rs.5,00,000/- for obtaining the job, are made against the 5 appellant’s husband, co-accused.
NON-REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 167 OF 2021
Archana Rana …Appellant
Versus
State of Uttar Pradesh and another …Respondents
J U D G M E N T
M.R. SHAH, J.
1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order
dated 27.11.2019 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in
Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 5213 of 2018, by which the High
Court has dismissed the said application preferred by the appellant herein to
1
quash chargesheet dated 10.05.2017 as well as the entire proceedings of Case
Crime No. 153 of 2016 under Sections 419, 420, 323, 504 and 506 IPC, P.S.
Kotwali, District Azamgarh, pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Azamgarh, the appellant-original accused No. 2 has preferred the
present appeal.
2. That respondent no.2 – complainant lodged an FIR against the appellant
herein and her husband for the offences under Sections 419, 420, 323, 504 and
506 IPC alleging, inter alia, that the appellant’s husband had taken a sum of
Rs.5,00,000/- from him for getting his son employed. However, his son did not
get any employment and subsequently when they went to the house of the
appellant to ask for the return of the money, the appellant assaulted the
complainant and threatened to get them falsely implicated in criminal cases and
the appellant pushed/thrown him and his son from her house. The same was
registered as Case Crime No. 153/2016 with P.S. Kotwali, District Azamgarh.
Thereafter, the investigating officer filed the chargesheet against the appellant
herein and one another for the offences under Sections 419, 420, 323, 504 and
506 IPC.
2.1 That the appellant herein approached the High Court by way of criminal
miscellaneous application No. 5213 of 2018 under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash
chargesheet dated 10.05.2017 as well as the entire criminal proceedings. By the
impugned judgment and order, the High Court has dismissed the said
2
application and has refused to quash the criminal proceedings/chargesheet.
Hence, the appellant has preferred the present appeal.
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant herein has
vehemently submitted that on a bare reading of the FIR and even the
chargesheet and the allegations taken on their face, no case is made out against
the appellant herein. It is submitted that at least no case is made out against the
appellant for the offences under Sections 419 & 420 IPC. It is submitted that
even if the averments in the complaint taken on their face do not constitute the
ingredients necessary for the offence or do not disclose the commission of an
offence under IPC. It is submitted that therefore the High Court ought to have
quashed the criminal proceedings against the appellant herein for the offences
under Sections 419, 420, 323, 504 and 506 IPC. Heavy reliance is placed on the
decision of this Court in the case of Prof. R.K. Vijayasarathy v. Sudha
Seetharam (2019) 16 SCC 739 and Dr. Lakshman v. State of Karnataka (2019)
9 SCC 677.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-State is not in a
position to satisfy the Court how a case is made out against the appellant herein
for the offences under Sections 419 & 420 IPC. However, it is submitted that at
least a case is made out against the appellant herein for the other offences, i.e.,
for the offences under Sections 323, 504 & 506 IPC.
3
4.1 Though served, nobody appears on behalf of respondent no.2 –
complainant.
5. Having heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and
learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-State and having gone
through the averments in the complaint and the chargesheet, even if the
averments made in the complaint are taken on their face, they do not constitute
the ingredients necessary for the offence under Sections 419 & 420 IPC. As
observed and held by this Court in the case of Prof. R.K. Vijayasarathy (supra),
the ingredients to constitute an offence under Section 420 are as follows:
i) a person must commit the offence of cheating under Section 415; and
ii) the person cheated must be dishonestly induced to
a) deliver property to any person; or
b) make, alter or destroy valuable security or anything signed or
sealed and capable of being converted into valuable security.
Thus, cheating is an essential ingredient for an act to constitute an offence under
Section 420 IPC. Cheating is defined under Section 415 of the IPC. The
ingredients to constitute an offence of cheating are as follows:
4
i) there should be fraudulent or dishonest inducement of a person by
deceiving him:
The person who was induced should be intentionally induced to deliver
any property to any person or to consent that any person shall retain any
property, or
the person who was induced should be intentionally induced to do or to
omit to do anything which he would not do or omit if he were not so deceived.
Thus, a fraudulent or dishonest inducement is an essential ingredient of
the offence under Section 415 IPC. A person who dishonestly induced any
person to deliver any property is liable for the offence of cheating.
6. Now, keeping in mind the relevant ingredients for the offences under
Sections 419 & 420 IPC, as noted hereinabove, it is required to be considered
whether the averments in the complaint taken on their face do constitute the
ingredients necessary for the offences under Sections 419 & 420 IPC, as
alleged.
Having gone through the complaint/FIR and even the chargesheet, it
cannot be said that the averments in the FIR and the allegations in the complaint
against the appellant constitute an offence under Section 419 & 420 IPC.
Whatever allegations are made for the offence with respect to inducement
and/or even giving Rs.5,00,000/- for obtaining the job, are made against the
5
appellant’s husband, co-accused. There are no allegations at all that the
appellant herein induced the complainant to get the job and the amount of
Rs.5,00,000/- was given to the appellant herein. Therefore, even if all the
allegations in the complaint taken at the face value are true, in our view, the
basic essential ingredients of cheating are missing. Therefore, this was a fit case
for the High Court to exercise the jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and to
quash the criminal proceedings against the appellant herein for the offences
under Section 419 & 420 IPC. The High Court has failed to exercise the
jurisdiction vested in it by not quashing the criminal proceedings against the
appellant herein for the offences under Sections 419 & 420 IPC.
7. Now so far as the FIR/chargesheet/criminal proceedings against the
appellant herein for the other offences, namely, under Sections 323, 504 & 506
IPC are concerned, the High Court has rightly not quashed the criminal
proceedings qua the said offences.
8. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, the present appeal
is allowed in part. The criminal proceedings against the appellant herein for the
offences under Section 419 & 420 IPC arising out of Case Crime No. 153/2016,
registered with P.S. Kotwali, District Azamgarh, pending in the Court of learned
Chief Judicial Magistrate, Azamgarh are hereby quashed and set aside.
The criminal proceedings against the appellant herein for the offences
under Sections 323, 504 & 506 IPC, pending in the Court of learned Chief
6
Judicial Magistrate, Azamgarh, shall be continued as per the chargesheet and
shall be disposed of in accordance with law, on their own merits.
………………………………….J.
[Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud]
New Delhi; …………………………………J.
March 01, 2021. [M.R. Shah]
7
