RAJU KRISHNA SHEDBALKAR [APPELLANT] Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA & ANR. [RESPONDENTS]
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.577 OF 2024
(2JB, SUDHANSHU DHULIA and PRASANNA BHALACHANDRA VARALE JJ.)
Facts: The appellant before this Court has challenged the order dated 12.07.2021 by which his 482 petition before the High Court was only partly allowed in as much as though the High Court has quashed the proceedings regarding offences under Sections 406/420/417 of Indian Penal Code as far as they relate to the co-accused, and also against the appellant so far as it relates to offences under Sections 406 & 420, but the criminal proceedings against the appellant have not been quashed under Section 417. Thus, still aggrieved he has come before this Court.
Issue: Whether offence under section 417 IPC is made out against the appellant?
Held: The court allowed the present appeal and held that, “We do not see how an offence even under Section 417 of IPC is made out against the present appellant. There can be multiple reasons for initiating a marriage proposal and then the proposal not reaching the desired end. It may in a given case involve cheating; it is possible theoretically yet in order to prove an offence of cheating in such cases prosecution must have reliable and trustworthy evidence in order to first prosecute such a case. There is no such evidence before the prosecution and therefore no offence under Section 417 is also made out. Consequently, we allow the appeal and set aside the order of the Trial Court to the extent it has refrained from quashing the proceedings under Section 417 IPC against the present appellant. The petition succeeds, the appeal is allowed, to the extend stated above.”
The court further observed that, “the offence of cheating is in two parts. The first is where a person fraudulently or dishonestly deceives another in inducing that person to deliver any property to any person etc. The second part of the offence would be made out if somebody is deceived to do an act which causes damage or harm to that person “in body, mind, or reputation or property is said to have cheated”. Time and again, this Court has reiterated that in order to make out an offence under cheating the intention to cheat or deceive should be right from the beginning. By no stretch of imagination, this is even reflected from the complaint made by the informant.”
