Breach of agreement to sell is not cheating or criminal breach of trust absent fraudulent inducement at inception.

A complaint arising from an agreement to sell was treated as a civil dispute because the allegations showed, at most, failure to perform the contract. The SC found no averment of fraudulent or dishonest inducement at the inception, no basis to say the complainant was deceived into parting with money, and no ingredients of criminal breach of trust. On that footing, the complaint did not disclose offences under Sections 406 or 420 of the Indian Penal Code and was liable to be quashed as an abuse of process.

---

---

Issues: Whether the criminal complaint alleging breach of an agreement to sell disclosed the offences of cheating and criminal breach of trust under the Indian Penal Code or was liable to be quashed as an abuse of the process of court.

Analysis: The complaint arose out of an agreement to sell and the allegations, even if accepted in full, showed at most failure to honour the agreement. No averment disclosed fraudulent or dishonest inducement at the inception, nor was there any basis to infer that the complainant was deceived into parting with money by such inducement. The facts also did not establish criminal breach of trust. The dispute was essentially civil in nature, and the appropriate remedy lay in civil proceedings rather than criminal prosecution.

Conclusion: The complaint did not disclose any offence under Sections 406 or 420 of the Indian Penal Code and was liable to be quashed.

Ratio Decidendi: A mere breach of an agreement to sell, without allegations showing fraudulent or dishonest inducement at the inception, does not constitute cheating or criminal breach of trust and cannot be pursued as a criminal complaint.

---