Going through Annexure A3 report, it is seen, similar allegations are raised against all the four accused in common, to prosecute them in the case for the offences imputed. Other than that there was a breach of contract over an agreement of sale relating to an immovable prosperity over which the 2nd accused exercised some right of disposition, even if it belongs to her daughters, I find the allegations set out do not spell out anything to indicate that she had practised deception when she entered into a contract with any person whether it be the 3rd accused or anyone else. Even on the allegations raised by the complainant there was no privity of contract between her and the complainant, but only with the 3rd accused. Complainant has no case that she (A2) had received any amount from him towards sale price of the immovable property, to constitute an offence under Section 420 of the IPC. Deception at the time when the transaction commenced has to be made out, apart from the wrongful loss to one party or wrongful gain to other party. In such circumstances prosecution of the petitioner (A2) for the offences imputed on the
