<?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>2019 (2) TMI 2064 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306603</link>
    <description>A criminal complaint may be quashed in inherent jurisdiction where, taken at face value, it does not disclose the essential ingredients of criminal breach of trust or cheating. Entrustment of property and dishonest misappropriation are necessary for breach of trust, while cheating requires dishonest inducement by deception leading to delivery of property or wrongful harm. On the pleaded facts, the complaint did not allege entrustment by the complainant or any deceptive inducement by the accused, and the dispute was essentially about return of money already transferred by the son. The proceedings were therefore treated as an abuse of process and a civil dispute was not permitted to be recast as a criminal case.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 15 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 May 2023 11:37:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=704477" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (2) TMI 2064 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306603</link>
      <description>A criminal complaint may be quashed in inherent jurisdiction where, taken at face value, it does not disclose the essential ingredients of criminal breach of trust or cheating. Entrustment of property and dishonest misappropriation are necessary for breach of trust, while cheating requires dishonest inducement by deception leading to delivery of property or wrongful harm. On the pleaded facts, the complaint did not allege entrustment by the complainant or any deceptive inducement by the accused, and the dispute was essentially about return of money already transferred by the son. The proceedings were therefore treated as an abuse of process and a civil dispute was not permitted to be recast as a criminal case.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 15 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306603</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>