The High Court of Judicature at Bombay dismissed a criminal application seeking quashing of a cheating complaint lodged under IPC 420, holding that the allegations disclosed a cognizable offence.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1/2
APL/430/2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.430 OF 2014
Shri Vijaykumar Sidram Bansode & Ors V/s Abhinav Ashok Teli & Anr.
….Applicants.
...Respondents
Mr. Chetan Patil for the Applicants. Mr. K.V. Saste, APP for the State.
CORAM: V. M. KANADE &
P.D. KODE JJ.
DATE: 22nd August, 2014
P.C.:-
2/2
APL/430/2014
cheating is not made out. It is submitted that, at the highest, it could be said that this is a case of non-payment of salary or delayed payment of salary. Secondly, it is submitted that the complaint has been filed against the Company and the applicants are the office bearers of the said Company and, therefore, they cannot be foisted with vicarious liability.
(P.D. KODE, J. ) (V.M. KANADE, J.)
BDPPS
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the criminal complaint disclosing promoter misconduct and non-payment of security deposits can be quashed under Section 482 CrPC.
Whether applicants as company office bearers can be proceeded against for vicarious liability.
Whether the allegations disclosed the commission of a cognizable offence of cheating.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Shri Vijaykumar Sidram Bansode & Ors
Abhinav Ashok Teli & Anr
V. M. Kanade
P. D. Kode
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
