Excelsior Correspondent
SRINAGAR, Nov 10: The High Court has ruled that mere breach of business contract cannot give rise to criminal prosecution for cheating and quashed an FIR registered by the police citing the same as abuse of process of law.
Justice Sanjay Dhar quashed an FIR registered with the Police Station Budgam and also the proceedings emanating from it by holding that mere breach of contract cannot give rise to a criminal prosecution for cheating.
The court said that unless fraudulent, dishonest intention is shown at the beginning of the transaction i.e., at the time when the offence is alleged to have been committed criminal proceedings cannot be initiated.
“The complaint relates to a commercial transaction or breach of contract, for which a civil remedy is available, is not by itself a ground to quash the criminal proceedings. It is only if it is shown that the complaint, even if taken at its face value does not disclose commission of any offence or if it is found that criminal proceedings have been initiated with malafides/malice for wreaking vengeance that the same can be quashed”, the court recorded.
Justice Dhar said the present case is a fit one where the court should exercise its powers under Section 528 of BNSS to prevent the abuse of process of law and to secure the ends of justice as the transaction between the parties (petitioner and complainant) appears purely of civil nature with no criminal colour to it.
“Accordingly, the petition is allowed and the impugned FIR bearing No. 228 of 2025 for offence under Section 318(4) of BNS registered with Police Station, Budgam, and the proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed”, the court concluded.
The petitioner-Mukhtar Ahmad Dar, through the medium of petition, has challenged FIR lodged on the basis of a complaint, made by complainant stating therein the petitioner offered to sell to him his two shops located in Dubai, UAE, for a total sale consideration of Rs. 20 crores, and for this purpose he proposed a meeting for finalizing transaction at Budgam near International Airport and had entered into an agreement with the petitioner for purchasing his two shops located at Dubai.
It is further stated by the complainant that all the petitioner proceeded to sell the two shops to another person and at the same time he called upon him to get the sale deed executed but he issued a cheque for the advance amount in favour of the complainant which got dishonored.
On the basis of the these facts, it has been alleged that the petitioner has committed the offence of cheating by dishonestly inducing the complainant to deliver a large sum of money and thereafter fraudulently dispose of the property to another person thereby causing wrongful loss to the complainant and wrongful gain to himself.
The Senior Counsel Altaf Haqani on behalf of the behalf of Dar has challenged the impugned FIR on the grounds that the same does not disclose commission of a cognizable offence ass there was a contractual relationship between the petitioner and the complainant without there being any element of animus to cheat on the part of the petitioner.
Follow our WhatsApp channel
