AJAY DHIR Vs. STATE AND ANR
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
State And Anr
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) The Petitioner claims to be aggrieved by an order dated 26.11.2006, framing charges offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420, Indian Penal Code (IPC).
(2.) As per the informant/complaint, a jeweller, sometime in end April, 2005, the Petitioner visited his shop, introduced himself as a senior functionary of Bharatiya Janta Party, and expressed a desire to buy jewellery for the marriage of his brother-in-law, who had come from Canada, and to promote business in Delhi and Canada. The Petitioner allegedly convinced the complainant, and took jewellery worth Rs. 2,00,000/-. He gave ornaments of about Rs. 70,000/- and two cheques for Rs. 1,25,000/-. The next day, the Petitioner asked some more jewellery to be taken to his place, which was done; jewellery worth Rs. 11 lakh was accordingly handed over. Despite repeated requests, neither jewellery was returned, nor was any amount paid; the Petitioner gave post dated cheques for Rs. 9.45 lakhs. All the cheques were dishonoured.
(3.) Mr. Vijay Agarwal, learned Counsel contended that the FIR, and chargesheet nowhere justified an order on charge, as issued by the trial court. According to him, the transaction was, purely a commercial one, with no element of criminality attributable to the Petitioner. It was urged that the offence of cheating was not made out since dishonest intention was absent, as was apparent from the fact that the Petitioner gave jewellery worth Rs. 70,000/- and cheques for Rs. 1.25 lakh. If dishonest intention is absent, there was no inducement within the meaning of Section 415/420 IPC.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.