The High Court of Kerala quashed a criminal complaint and cognizance taken under Section 420 IPC. The court held that an internal dispute over property shares executed by a co-owner does not constitute cheating, especially where the complainant had no possession or active interference for over 12 years.
Complaint and cognizance taken thereof are hereby quashed.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.SOMARAJAN
FRIDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 28TH PHALGUNA, 1942
Crl.MC.No.3913 OF 2016(H)
IN CC 73/2014 OF CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, THODUPUZHA
PETITIONER/2nd ACCUSED:
JEROME SEBASTIAN, S/o DEVASSIA, PANACHINANICKAL HOUSE, THUDANGANADU KARA, MUTTOM VILLAGE, THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DISTRICT
BY ADV. SRI.T.R.HARIKUMAR
RESPONDENTS/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT/1st ACCUSED & STATE:
1 SUNNY, S/o. DEVASSIA, PANACHINANICKAL HOUSE, CHEPPUKULANGARA, UDUMBANOOR VILLAGE, THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DISTRICT - 685584
2 SEBASTIAN, S/o DEVASSIA, PANACHINANICKAL HOUSE, THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DISTRICT - 685584
3 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, KOCHI 682031
R1 BY ADVS. SRI.A.R.DILEEP SRI.GEORGE VARGHESEPERUMPALLIKUTTIYIL SRI.P.J.JOE PAUL SRI.MANU SEBASTIAN R3 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. E.C.BINEESH
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.M.C.No.3913 of 2016
2
ORDER
A document of transfer executed by one of the
persons, a co-sharer, who obtained the property by devolution on the death of his father in favour of accused No.2, is brought under challenge to extend criminal liability under Section 420 IPC on the ground that the complainant is having a fractional interest over the said property by devolution and that the said document was executed ignoring his share over the property and thereby committed deception and fraud. In order to sustain an action under Section 420 IPC, the ingredients which would constitute 'cheating' as defined under Section 415 IPC must be satisfied. Even according to the complainant, accused No.1 played fraud and deception on accused No.2 by executing a deed of transfer of property than what he is legally entitled to. It is an internal matter between accused Nos.1 and 2. Since the complainant is not a party to the document of transfer, it would not bind on him, unless the same is coupled with possession of property in derogation of
Crl.M.C.No.3913 of 2016 3
right of other co-owners and the same was allowed to continue for a long period of 12 years. A mere execution of a deed of transfer by one of the co-owners with respect to the property though in excess will not constitute any cause of action to maintain an action under Section 420 IPC. Hence, the complaint and the cognizance taken thereof is hereby quashed.
Crl.M.C. is allowed accordingly.
Sd/-
P.SOMARAJAN JUDGE
DMR/-
Crl.M.C.No.3913 of 2016
4
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES:
| ANNEXURE | I | A TRUE COPY OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT BEF MAGISTRATE COURT, 09.01.2014 |
COMPLAINT FILED BY THE ORE THE CHIEF JUDICIAL THODUPUZHA, DATED |
|---|---|---|---|
| ANNEXURE | II | A TRUE COPY OF THE IN CMP.NO. 221/201 |
ORDER DATED 12.06.2014 4 |
| ANNEXURE | III | A TRUE COPY OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT IN 08.05.2014 |
DEPOSITION GIVEN BY THE CMP.NO. 221/2014 ON |
| ANNEXURE |
IV |
A TRUE COPY OF THE DATED 30.05.2012 O |
GIFT DEED No.2398/2012 F KARIKODE SRO. |
| ANNEXURE |
V |
A TRUE COPY OF THE 2147/1/2016 DATED SRO. |
CANCELLATION DEED No. 29.07.2016 OF KARIKODE |
| ANNEXURE |
VI |
A TRUE COPY OF THE 04.12.2015 OF KARI |
DEED No.3087/15 DATED KODE SRO. |
RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURE: NIL
// TRUE COPY //
P.A. TO JUDGE
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a transfer document executed by one co-sharer in excess of his legal share constitutes cheating under Section 420 IPC when it is an internal dispute between co-owners.
Whether an internal family dispute regarding property devolution and fractional interests warrants criminal liability for fraud.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Jerome Sebastian
Sunny
Sebastian
State of Kerala
P.SOMARAJAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
