<?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>2024 (3) TMI 442 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450661</link>
    <description>Criminal proceedings arising from a loan transaction were found unsustainable because the complaint did not prima facie disclose the essential ingredients of criminal breach of trust or cheating. Entrustment with dishonest misappropriation, required for offences under Sections 406 and 409 IPC, was not shown, and there was no material of fraudulent or dishonest inducement at the inception, required for Section 420 IPC. The dispute was treated as one relating to repayment under a commercial arrangement, and the existence of overlapping civil or cheque-bounce proceedings did not by itself establish criminal liability. The proceedings were therefore held liable to be quashed as an abuse of process.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 07 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 11 Mar 2024 06:24:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=746340" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (3) TMI 442 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450661</link>
      <description>Criminal proceedings arising from a loan transaction were found unsustainable because the complaint did not prima facie disclose the essential ingredients of criminal breach of trust or cheating. Entrustment with dishonest misappropriation, required for offences under Sections 406 and 409 IPC, was not shown, and there was no material of fraudulent or dishonest inducement at the inception, required for Section 420 IPC. The dispute was treated as one relating to repayment under a commercial arrangement, and the existence of overlapping civil or cheque-bounce proceedings did not by itself establish criminal liability. The proceedings were therefore held liable to be quashed as an abuse of process.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 07 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450661</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>