TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (1) TMI 1632
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., dated 12.04.2018, passed by the High Court of Gujarat, in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 4033 of 2012, wherein the High Court has dismissed appellant's application seeking quashing of the order framing the charges dated 04.12.2013 by the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate in Criminal Case No. 388 of 2012. 3. It is pertinent to note the facts giving rise to the appeal in a detailed manner. The respondent no. 2complainant is the director of a money lending company by the name of Dharshan Fiscal Pvt. Ltd. The appellant, who is a retired bank employee, approached the complainant's company in the month of January 2008 for a loan of Rs. 27,00,000/. Accordingly, the respondent no. 2 transferred the funds as a loan, which was to ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of 2012 wherein he sought for the inclusion of prayer seeking to quash and set aside the charge sheet no. 28/ 2012 in FIR No. I/C.R No.22/2012 and the charges framed by the Metropolitan Magistrate vide order dated 04.12.2013 and all further proceeding carried out in Criminal Case no. 388/2012 pending before the Additional Metropolitan Magistrate. 6. It is pertinent to note that, simultaneously respondent no.2 had preferred a summary suit in Summary Civil Suit no. 928/2011 seeking the recovery of Rs. 33,46,225/which was inclusive of the interest upon the principal amount. The same was admitted on 25.04.2011 and is still pending before the City Civil Judge, Ahmedabad. 7. Vide order dated 12.04.2018, the High Court dismissed the quashin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ant had fraudulent intention from the beginning having induced the respondent no.2 to lend the aforesaid amount of Rs. 27 lacs. Further, the appellant never had the intention to repay the loan even though multiple requests were made to him. The counsel pressed that whether the intention was to cheat from the inception or not is a question of fact and the same can only be decided by trial after appreciating the entire evidence. 10. Before we analyse this case, it is to be noted that the criminal application preferred by the accused before the High Court was against the order of the Trial Court at the stage of framing of charges, wherein it is the duty of the court to apply its judicial mind to the material placed before it and to come to ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f a promise, agreement or contract does not, ipso facto, constitute the offence of the criminal breach of trust contained in Section 405 IPC without there being a clear case of entrustment. 13. In this context, we may note that there is nothing either in the complaint or in any material before us, pointing to the fact that any property was entrusted to the appellant at all which he dishonestly converted for his own use so as to satisfy the ingredients of Section 405 punishable under Section 406 of IPC. Hence the learned Magistrate committed a serious error in issuing process against the appellants for the said offence. Unfortunately, the High Court also failed to correct this manifest error. 14. Now coming to the charge under Section ....