Even 1.5 Years in Jail Doesn’t Dilute Section 37 NDPS Rigour: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Bail in 710 Kg Poppy Husk Case Stay of Conviction Nullifies Disqualification Under Section 8(3) RP Act: Allahabad High Court Dismisses Quo Warranto Against Rahul Gandhi Custodial Interrogation Necessary to Uncover ₹2 Crore MGNREGA Scam: Kerala High Court Rejects Anticipatory Bail for Vendors in Corruption Case Order 41 Rule 23 CPC | Trial Court Cannot Decide Title Solely on a Vacated Judgment: Himachal Pradesh High Court Strikes By Bar Associations Cannot Stall Justice: Allahabad High Court Holds Office Bearers Liable for Contempt if Revenue Suits Are Delayed Due to Boycotts To Constitute a Service PE, Services Must Be Furnished Within India Through Employees Present in India: Delhi High Court Medical Negligence | State Liable for Loss of Vision in Botched Cataract Surgeries: Gauhati High Court Awards Compensation Waiver of Right Under Section 50 NDPS is Valid Even Without Panch Signatures: Bombay High Court Agricultural Land Is 'Property' Under Hindu Women’s Right to Property Act, 1937: A.P. High Court Tenant Who Pays Rent After Verifying Landlord’s Will Cannot Dispute His Title Under Section 116 Evidence Act: Himachal Pradesh High Court Dismisses Eviction Challenge by HP State Cooperative Bank Clever Drafting Cannot Override Limitation Bar: Gujarat High Court Rejects Suit for Specific Performance Once Divorce by Mutual Consent Is Final, Wife Cannot Pursue Criminal Case for Stridhan Without Reserving Right to Do So: Himachal Pradesh High Court Caste-Based Insults Must Show Intent – Mere Abuse Not Enough for Atrocities Act: Gujarat High Court Upholds Acquittal Failure to Inform Detenu of Right to Represent to Detaining Authority Vitiates NSA Detention: Gauhati High Court Awarding Further Interest On Penal Charges Is Contrary To Fundamental Policy Of Indian Arbitration Law: Bombay High Court

FIR Quashed - Civil Liability Cannot be Converted into Criminal Case: Punjab & Haryana High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana emphasized that mere breach of a contractual agreement does not amount to criminal offense under Sections 420 & 120-B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

Background: The Court considered the petition under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.) for quashing FIR No. 38 dated 01.07.2022, filed under Sections 420 & 120-B of IPC, which involved allegations of cheating and criminal conspiracy connected to a breach of a marital agreement.

Facts and Issues: The FIR, based on an agreement executed between the parties’ parents, alleged that the petitioner, Manpreet Kaur, did not fulfill her obligation to assist her husband, the respondent, in immigrating to Canada, despite substantial financial expenditure incurred by the respondent's family.

Civil Remedy Over Criminal Prosecution: The Court observed that the agreement provided for a civil remedy in case of breach and stressed that turning a civil dispute into a criminal prosecution is an abuse of law. The court cited the cases "Mariam Fasihuddin v. State by Adugodi Police Station" (2024 INSC 49) and "Anand Kumar Mohatta v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)" (2019(11) SCC 706) in support of its decision.

Interpretation of Cheating: The Court held that there was no initial dishonest intent or inducement by the petitioner, thus not meeting the criteria for Section 420 IPC.

Abuse of Legal Process: The petitioners' actions were deemed not to constitute cheating, and initiating criminal proceedings for a contractual breach was seen as an abuse of the judicial process.

Decision: The FIR No. 38 dated 01.07.2022 was quashed, with the Court directing that civil liabilities should not be transformed into criminal cases.

Date of Decision: March 15, 2024

Manpreet Kaur and another v. State of Punjab and another

Latest Legal News