<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2014 (10) TMI 1043 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296507</link>
    <description>A criminal complaint arising from a contractual payment dispute may be quashed under Section 482 CrPC where, on a face-value reading, it does not disclose the essential ingredients of the alleged offences. For criminal breach of trust, the complaint must show entrustment and dishonest misappropriation or retention in violation of the obligation; for cheating, it must show dishonest inducement at the inception. On the pleaded facts, the dispute was essentially non-payment of a bill and the parties had already pursued civil remedies. The complaint lacked any factual foundation for entrustment, dishonest misappropriation, or dishonest inducement, so the prosecution could not be sustained and was quashed by the SC.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 30 Oct 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 20 Jul 2022 14:22:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=650556" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (10) TMI 1043 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296507</link>
      <description>A criminal complaint arising from a contractual payment dispute may be quashed under Section 482 CrPC where, on a face-value reading, it does not disclose the essential ingredients of the alleged offences. For criminal breach of trust, the complaint must show entrustment and dishonest misappropriation or retention in violation of the obligation; for cheating, it must show dishonest inducement at the inception. On the pleaded facts, the dispute was essentially non-payment of a bill and the parties had already pursued civil remedies. The complaint lacked any factual foundation for entrustment, dishonest misappropriation, or dishonest inducement, so the prosecution could not be sustained and was quashed by the SC.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 30 Oct 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296507</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>