1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New: Section-Wise Filter ✕
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
<h1>Complaint Dismissed: Court Rules Dishonored Cheques as Civil Breach, Not Criminal Offense.</h1> The HC quashed the complaint and FIR against the Petitioner under Sections 406 and 420 IPC, determining that the dishonored cheques were to settle a ... - Issues:1. Quashing of complaint under Sections 406, 415, 420, and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.2. Setting aside of First Information Report under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code.Analysis:In the judgment delivered by Hon'ble Judge Pritpal Singh, two connected petitions under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure were addressed. The first petition sought to quash a complaint filed by the Respondent under various sections of the Indian Penal Code against the Petitioner in the Court of Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Panipat. The second petition aimed to set aside a First Information Report recorded at the Police Station against the Petitioner on the same facts. The allegations revolved around the supply of carpet woolen yarn by the Respondent to the Petitioner, followed by the dishonoring of cheques issued by the Petitioner for the payment of the goods.The judgment referred to a previous ruling in Iqbal Singh Randhawa v. Doctor Satpal Goyal, establishing that an offence under Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code is distinct from an offence under Section 420. It highlighted that an accused cannot be tried for both offences simultaneously, as they represent different criminal acts. Another precedent cited was the judgment in Chhote Lal Aggarwal v. The State of Punjab, emphasizing the importance of distinguishing between a cheque issued to discharge an existing liability and a cheque issued against delivery of goods. The former may constitute a breach of promise, while the latter could indicate an intention to cheat.The Court analyzed the facts of the case and concluded that the cheques issued by the Petitioner were to discharge a pre-existing liability, not against the delivery of goods. Therefore, the dishonoring of the cheques amounted to a breach of promise, constituting a civil liability rather than a criminal offence under Section 406 or Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code. Consequently, the Court quashed the impugned complaint, the First Information Report, and all related proceedings in the Court of Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Panipat, based on this interpretation of the law.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
