Quashed

Kapil Jangid v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC2 Aug 2024CRLMP/2912/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Single Judges Bench quashed the First Cancellation Order pursuant to Section 482 CrPC. The court held the dispute was essentially civil in nature involving breach of contract and sale of goods. Allegations of cheating and criminal breach of trust did not disclose necessary ingredients as no fraudulent intention at the time of promise was evident.

What did the court decide?

The Cancellation Order dated 01.12.2015 and First Cancellation Order dated 20.11.2015 stood quashed. Parties advised to appear for further orders contemplated under Section 482.

Kapil Jangid Vs State of Rajasthan — Cheque Dishonour | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:31954]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 2912/2023

¶4

Kapil Jangid S/o Kailashchander Jangid, Aged About 36 Years, R/o 2/626, Kudi Bhagtasani Housing Board, Jodhpur.

¶5

Sanjay Pareek S/o Shyam Sundar Pareek, Aged About 39 Years, R/o 2A Varsha Vihar, Opposite Hutach Tower, Bhatti Ki Baori, Jodhpur.

¶6

----Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp 2. Pathram Bishnoi S/o Mohan Lal Bishnoi, R/o 15, Abhaygarh Scheme, Air Force Area, Ratanada, Police Station Ratanada, Jodhpur.

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Nishant Bora
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. S.K. Mehar, PP With Mr. Avinash Godara
	Mr. Vineet Jain,Sr. Adv. assisted by
	Mr. Pravin Vyas
	Mr. Harshvardhan Singh

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGENDRA KUMAR PUROHIT

¶12

Order

¶13

Reserved on 12/07 /2024 Pronounced on 02/08 /2024

¶14

Reportable

¶15

01;kph dh vksj ls ;g ;kfpdk vUrxZr /kkjk 482 lhvkj-ih-lh- izLrqr dj v/khuLFk U;k;ky; egkuxj eftLVªsV la[;k 4] tks/kiqj egkuxj ds le{k yafcr izdj.k la[;k 53@23] LVsV cuke dfiy tkafxM oxSjk] izFke lwpuk fjiksVZ la[;k 319@2015] iqfyl Fkkuk ckluh dh leLr izkslsfMax dks fujLr fd, tkus dh izkFkZuk dh xbZ gSA

¶16

02la{ksi esa ekeys ds rF; bl izdkj ls gSa fd eqLrxhl&izR;FkhZ la[;k 2 dh vksj ls ,d fyf[kr nj[okLr Fkkukf/kdkjh] iqfyl Fkkuk ckluh] tks/kiqj ds le{k

(2 of 16)

[2024:RJ-JD:31954]

[CRLMP-2912/2023]

izLrqr dj ;g fuosnu fd;k fd eqLrxhl dh ,d QSDVh b.Ml VªsM uke ls rukoM+k esa fLFkr gSA bl QSDVªh esa gSMhØkQ~V dk eky fuekZ.k o fu;kZr fd;k tkrk gSA djhc 5&6 ekg igys eSflo ekscy dEiuh ds iSVªhd LukbZMj] dfiy tkafxM ,oa lat; ikjhd vk, ftUgksaus Lo;a dks Hkkjr esa th-ds- ekscy oVªhcl dk ,tsaV gksuk crk;k o bf.M;k ls vkWMZj nsdj eky fons'kksa esa fHktokus dk dk;Z gksuk crk;kA rRi'pkr thds- ekscy oVªhcl v.Vj gSM teZuh ds vkns'k Øekad 25003769 fnukad 17-06-2015 o vkns'k Øekad 25004244 fnukad 03-08-2015 fnyk;s] tks eky nks daVsujksa esa buokWbZl u vkbZ-Vh- 61 fnukad 15-10-2015 o vkbZ-Vh- 62 fnukad 23-10-2015 ds tfj, f'ki dj fHktok;k vkSj eky [kjhnus okyh dEiuh ls Qksu ls ckr djok nhA

¶21

03eqLrxhl dh vksj ls ;g Hkh fuosnu fd;k fd dEiuh us crk;k fd eky igqapus ij fcYVh ¼Bill of Lading½ ds cnys Hkqxrku dj fn;k tk,xkA ftl ij dLVe Dyh;j djokdj 47 yk[k dk eky lqiqnZ dj fn;k] mUgksaus dgk fd fcYVh vkidks eky f'kfiax gksrs gh ns nsaxsA fcYVh ¼Bill of Lading½ xzkgd ls cSad ds ekQZr iSesaV izkIr djus ds fy, vko';d gksrh gSA ijarq muds }kjk fcYVh ekaxus ij ugha nh vkSj ;g dgk fd fcYVh Hkh geus ikVhZ dks Hkst nh rc eqLrxhl us dgk fd fcuk ijfe'ku ds fcYVh ikVhZ dks dSls Hksth] rc mUgksaus dgk fd /kks[ks esa j[kdj eky izkIr djuk Fkk o vkxs teZuh esa Hkh eky iSVªhd ds HkkbZ ds uke ls tk,xkA eky o fcYVh pyh xbZ] isaesaV tc bPNk gksxh rc nsaxs oxSjk oxSjk fjiksVZ ij izFke lwpuk fjiksVZ la[;k 319@15 vUrxZr /kkjk 420] 406] 467] 468] 120ch Hkkjrh; n.M lafgrk esa ntZ dj rQrh'k dh xbZ vkSj ckn rQrh'k ;kphx.k ds fo:) /kkjk 420] 406] 120ch Hkkjrh; n.M lafgrk esa pkyku is'k djus ij fnukad 22-03-2023 dks v/khuLFk U;k;ky; }kjk izlaKku fy;k tkdj izdj.k cgl pktZ gsrq fu;r fd;k x;kA

¶22

04;kph dh vksj ls viuh ;kfpdk esa ;g fuosnu fd;k fd eqLrxhl] ;kphx.k o mudh dEiuh ds lkFk 6 o"kksZa ls dk;Z dj jgk gSA ;kphx.k dh vksj ls dkQh vkns'k eqLrxhl dks fn, x,A eqLrxhl th-ds- ekscy oVªhcl ds lkFk rhu o"kksZa ls O;olk; dj jgk gSA ;kphx.k }kjk orZeku VªkatsD'ku Hkh th-ds- ekscy oVªhcl dh vksj ls gh eqLrxhl dks fn;k x;kA eqLrxhl }kjk mDr vkns'k ds vuqlkj eky Hkstk x;k] ftldk Hkqxrku eqLrxhl dks fd;k tk pqdk gSA ;kphx.k th-ds- ekscy oVªhcl ds [kjhn ds laca/k esa ,tsaV gSA 30]000 MkWyj eqLrxhl dEiuh dks ,Mokal esa iwoZ esa fn;k gqvk Fkk] vkbZ-Vh- 61 o vkbZ-Vh- 62 vkns'k ds eky dh dqy dher 71]192 MkWyj Fkh] ftlesa 30]000 MkWyj ,Mokal jkf'k ,MtLV djus

(3 of 16)

[2024:RJ-JD:31954]

[CRLMP-2912/2023]

ds i'pkr cdk;k jkf'k 41]192 MkWyj th-ds- ekscy oVªhcl }kjk 04-11-2015 dks vnk dj nh xbZ] ftlls Li"V gS fd leLr jkf'k dh vnk;xh dh tk pqdh gSA

¶27

05;kphx.k dh vksj ls ;g fuosnu fd;k fd mDr jkf'k ,MtLV djus ls iwoZ th-ds- ekscy oVªhcl dh vksj ls eqLrxhl dks ,d bZ&esy bl ckcr fnukad 0311-2015 dks Hkstk x;kA tks eqLrxhl dks 2 bUokWbl ds isVs ,MtLV djus gsrq fy[kk x;kA bl vk/kkj ij dksbZ jkf'k cdk;k ugha gksus ls ;g dk;Zokgh fujLr fd, tkus ;ksX; gSA bZ&esy dk tokc eqLrxhl dh vksj ls fnukad 06-11-2015 dks fn;k x;kA /kkjk 420 Hkkjrh; n.M lafgrk ds vijk/k ds fy, eq[; vk/kkj bUM~;wlesaV gksrk gS] tks bl ekeys esa ugha gSA ;kph }kjk Qs;j dkef'kZ;y VªkaltsD'ku fd;k x;k gS vkSj vius fgLls dh ikyuk ;kphx.k dh vksj ls dh xbZ gSA bl vk/kkj ij pktZ'khV ds rgr dh tkus okyh dk;Zokgh fujLr fd, tkus ;ksX; gSA vuqla/kku vf/kdkjh }kjk bl ekeys esa ;g vk/kkj fy;k x;k fd eqLrxhl ds deZpkjh egsUnz flag iq= ja.kthr flag dks ;kphx.k }kjk va/ksjs esa j[kdj Sea way bill tkjh djus dh lgefr izkIr dj yhA vuqla/kku esa ;g ugha ekuk x;k fd teZu dEiuh }kjk bu daVsuj dk Hkqxrku u fd;k x;k gksA eqLrxhl QeZ }kjk Duty Drawback, Director General of Foreign Trade ls vkbZ-Vh 61] 62 o 63 ds laca/k esa izkIr dj fy;k x;k gSA tks lVhZfQdsV vuqla/kku vf/kdkjh dks fn, x, Fks ijarq vuqla/kku vf/kdkjh }kjk pkyku ds lkFk layXu ugha fd, x,A ,slh voLFkk esa /kkjk 420] 406 Hkkjrh; n.M lafgrk dk vijk/k ?kfVr ugha gqvk gSA bl vk/kkj ij fopkj.k U;k;ky; dh dk;Zokgh dks fujLr fd, tkus dh izkFkZuk dhA

¶28

06cgl ;kfpdk lquh xbZA

¶29

07fo}ku vf/koDrk ;kphx.k dh vksj ls ;g rdZ izLrqr fd;k x;k fd bl ekeys esa eqLrxhl dk eq[; vkjksi ;g gS fd fcYVh ¼Bill of Lading½ vly eqLrxhl dks u nsdj lh/ks teZuh fHktok nh xbZA ftlds fy, eqLrxhl dh lgefr ugha FkhA bl vk/kkj ij gh ;g eqdnek ntZ djok;k x;k Fkk vkSj iqfyl }kjk ckn vuqla/kku vUrxZr /kkjk 406] 420] 120ch esa vijk/k cuuk ik;k tkdj pkyku is'k fd;k vkSj v/khuLFk U;k;ky; }kjk Hkh bl ij izlaKku fy;k x;k tcfd /kkjk 420] 406] 120ch ds vijk/k ?kfVr gksus ds rRo bl ekeys esa fo|eku ugha gSA fdlh izdkj dk /kks[kk ;kphx.k dh vksj ls ugha fd;k x;k u gh vekur esa [k;kur dh xbZA eqLrxhl dEiuh dk iwoZ ls gh O;kikj ;kphx.k o mldh dEiuh ds ek/;e ls FkkA tks vkbZ-Vh 61 o 62 ds eky Hksts x;s] mlds laca/k esa iwoZ esa ,Mokal jkf'k 30]000 MkWyj tek Fkh] rFkk 'ks"k jkf'k teZu dEiuh }kjk eqLrxhl dEiuh dks ns nh xbZA iwoZ

(4 of 16)

[2024:RJ-JD:31954]

[CRLMP-2912/2023]

esa tek ,Mokal jkf'k dks ,MtLV djus ds l a ca/k esa eqLrxhl dEiuh dks bZ&esy Hkstk x;k FkkA eqLrxhl dEiuh dh vksj ls ;g dgk x;k fd vafre fcy ds le; ,Mokal jkf'k ,MtLV dj yh tkosA ftl ij iqu% bZ&esy Hkst fn;k x;k Fkk] ftlesa Li"V dj fn;k x;k Fkk fd vkbZUnk dksbZ O;kikj ugha fd;k tk,xk vkSj 2 fcy isVs 15&15 gtkj MkWyj ,MtLV dj fn, tk,axsA ftldk tokc Hkstdj eqLrxhl dEiuh dh vksj ls lgefr izdV dh xbZ FkhA

¶34

08fo}ku vf/koDrk ;kph dh vksj ls ;g Hkh rdZ izLrqr fd;k fd bl ekeys esa teZu dh dEiuh }kjk Sea way bill (Express Bill½ dh ekax dh tk jgh FkhA ftlds fy, eqLrxhl dEiuh dks bZ&esy Hkstk x;k Fkk] ftl ij Ok Proceed tokc esa fy[k fn;k x;kA ftl ij Sea way bill teZu dh dEiuh dks Hkst fn;k x;k Fkk] dksbZ jkf'k vkbZ-Vh 61 o vkbZ-Vh- 62 ds laca/k esa cdk;k ugha gSA bl vk/kkj ij fopkj.k U;k;ky; esa yafcr dk;Zokfg;kas dks fujLr fd, tkus dh izkFkZuk dhA

¶35

09fo}ku vf/koDrk ;kph dh vksj ls ;g Hkh rdZ izLrqr fd;k x;k fd vkbZ-Vh 61 o vkbZ-Vh 62 ds laca/k esa Director General of Foreign Trade ls Duty Drawback eqLrxhl&v;kph la[;k 2 }kjk fy;k tk pqdk gSA vius rdZ ds leFkZu esa nks U;kf;d n`"Vkarksa dh vksj esjk /;ku vkdf"kZr fd;kA

¶36

10fo}ku vf/koDrk eqLrxhl&izR;FkhZ la[;k 2 dh vksj ls ;g rdZ izLrqr fd;k x;k fd bl ekeys esa ;g r; gqvk Fkk fd fcYVh ¼Bill of Lading½ vly eqLrxhl dks nh tk,xh vkSj jde dk Hkqxrku gksus ij gh eky NqM+k;k tkus dk r; gqvk Fkk] ijarq fcYVh ¼Bill of Lading½ eqLrxhl dks u nsdj eqfYteku }kjk teZu dEiuh dks Hkst fn;k x;k] tks Li"Vr;k% eqLrxhl ds lkFk /kks[kk fd;k x;kA Sea way bill ds fy, eqLrxhl dh vksj ls lgefr ugha nh xbZ FkhA eqLrxhl ds lqijokbZtj egsUnz ls ;kphx.k }kjk xyr rjhds ls Ok Proceed dk bZ&esy djok fy;k x;k] tks bZ&esy eqLrxhl dEiuh ds Lohd`r bZ&esy ls u dj nwljs bZ&esy ls fd;k x;kA fo}ku vf/koDrk eqLrxhl&izR;FkhZ la[;k 2 dh vksj ls ;g Hkh rdZ izLrqr fd;k x;k fd eqLrxhl dh vksj ls vkbZ-Vh 61 o vkbZ-Vh 62 fcy esa ,Mokal jkf'k 30]000 MkWyj ,MtLV djus dh lgefr ugha nh xbZ FkhA cfYd mudh vksj ls ;g esy dk tokc fn;k x;k Fkk fd vafre fcy esa ,Mokal jkf'k ,MtLV dj yh tkosA ijarq fcuk lgefr ds gh ,Mokal jkf'k ,MtLV dj yh xbZ] tks fof/klEer ugha gSA fo}ku vf/koDrk v;kph la[;k 2 dh vksj ls ;g Hkh rdZ izLrqr fd;k x;k fd ,Mokal jkf'k ,MtLV dj ysus ls cdk;k vkWMZj ds laca/k esa tks v;kph la[;k

(5 of 16)

[2024:RJ-JD:31954]

[CRLMP-2912/2023]

2 }kjk eky rS;kj djok;k tk jgk Fkk] mlds laca/k eas teZu dEiuh }kjk iwoZ vkWMZj dks fujLr dj fn;k x;kA ;fn fcYVh ¼Bill of Lading½ teZu dEiuh dks ugha nh tkrh rks vkbZ-Vh- 61 o vkbZ-Vh 62 dk eky teZu dEiuh dks ugha feyrk vkSj mlds laca/k esa jde nsus ij gh eky teZu dEiuh NqM+k ldrh Fkh vkSj dsaly fd, x, vkWMZj ds laca/k esa ,Mokal jkf'k dks eqLrxhl tIr dj ldrk Fkk ijarq vc eqLrxhl ,slk ugha dj ldrkA

¶41

11v;kph la[;k 2 dh vksj ls nkSjkus cgl ;g Lohdkj fd;k x;k fd, Director General of Foreign Trade ls vkbZ-Vh 61 o vkbZ-Vh 62 ds laca/k esa Duty Drawback muds }kjk ys fy;k x;k gSA

¶42

12fo}ku vf/koDrk ;kphx.k dh vksj ls iqu% cgl djrs gq, ;g rdZ izLrqr fd;k fd v;kph la[;k 2&eqLrxhl us izFke lwpuk fjiksVZ esa ;g vk/kkj ugha fy;k fd ,Mokal jkf'k vkbZ-Vh 61 o vkbZ-Vh 62 esa ,MtLV gks tkus dh lwjr esa vkWMZj fujLr gksus ls v;kph la[;k 2&eqLrxhl }kjk ,Mokal jkf'k tek ugha jgus ls tIr ugha dj ldrkA

¶43

13eSaus mijksDr rdksZa ij euu fd;kA i=koyh dk lko/kkuhiwoZd voyksdu fd;kA bl ekeys esa loZizFke fof/kd fLFkfr ij fopkj fd;k tk jgk gSA /kkjk 482 lhvkj-ih-lh- ds rgr v/khuLFk U;k;ky; esa yafcr QkStnkjh dk;Zokgh dc fujLr dh tk ldrh gS] bl laca/k esa ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; }kjk vius U;kf;d n`"Vkar Naresh Kumar & Anr. Vs. The State of Karnataka & Anr. (2024 INSC 196) ds iSjk la[;k 6 esa fuEukuqlkj mfYyf[kr fd;k x;k gS%&

¶44

In the case of Paramjeet Batra v. State of Uttarakhand (2013) 11 SCC 673, this Court recognized that although the inherent powers of a High Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure should be exercised sparingly, yet the High Court must not hesitate in quashing such criminal proceedings which are essentially of a civil nature. This is what was held:

¶45

“12. While exercising its jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code the High Court has to be cautious. This power is to be used sparingly and only for the purpose of preventing abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure ends of justice. Whether a complaint discloses a criminal offence or not depends upon the nature of facts alleged therein. Whether essential ingredients of criminal offence are present or not has to be judged by the High Court. A

(6 of 16)

[2024:RJ-JD:31954]

[CRLMP-2912/2023]

complaint disclosing civil transactions may also have a criminal texture. But the High Court must see whether a dispute which is essentially of a civil nature is given a cloak of criminal offence. In such a situation, if a civil remedy is available and is, in fact, adopted as has happened in this case, the High Court should not hesitate to quash the criminal proceedings to prevent abuse of process of the court.” (emphasis supplied)

¶50

Relying upon the decision in Paramjeet Batra (supra), this Court in Randheer Singh v. State of U.P. (2021) 14 SCC 626, observed that criminal proceedings cannot be taken recourse to as a weapon of harassment. In Usha Chakraborty & Anr. v. State of West Bengal & Anr. 2023 SCC OnLine SC 90, relying upon Paramjeet Batra (supra) it was again held that where a dispute which is essentially of a civil nature, is given a cloak of a criminal offence, then such disputes can be quashed, by exercising 8 the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶51

14mDr fof/kd fLFkfr ds lkFk&lkFk /kkjk 420] 406] 120ch Hkkjrh; n.M lafgrk ds vijk/k ds fy, D;k fof/kd fLFkfr gS] bl ij Hkh ujs'k dqekj ¼iwoksZDr½ ds ekeys esa ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; }kjk iSjk la[;k 7 esa fuEukuqlkj foospu fd;k x;k gS%&

¶52

Essentially, the present dispute between the parties relates to a breach of contract. A mere breach of contract, by one of the parties, would not attract prosecution for criminal offence in every case, as held by this Court in Sarabjit Kaur v. State of Punjab and Anr. (2023) 5 SCC 360. Similarly, dealing with the distinction between the offence of cheating and a mere breach of contractual obligations, this Court, in Vesa Holdings (P) Ltd. v. State of Kerala, (2015) 8 SCC 293, has held that every breach of contract would not give rise to the offence of cheating, and it is required to be shown that the accused had fraudulent or dishonest intention at the time of making the promise.

¶53

15/kkjk 420 Hkkjrh; n.M lafgrk ds vijk/k ds laca/k esa ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; ds }kjk Usha Chakraborty & Anr. versus State of West Bengal & Anr. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 67 d s iSjk la[;k 6-1 esa fuEukuqlkj foospu fd;k gS%&

¶54

6.1 The basic requirements/ingredients to bring home the accusations under the alleged offences are hereunder:-

¶55

Offence punishable under Section 420, IPC.

(7 of 16)

[2024:RJ-JD:31954]

[CRLMP-2912/2023]

To constitute the said offence there must be deception i.e., the accused must have deceived someone; that by such deception the accused must induce a person (i) to deliver any property; or (ii) to make, alter, destroy a whole or part of the valuable security or anything which is signed or sealed and which is capable of being converted into a valuable property; or (iii) that the accused must have done so dishonestly. The offence punishable under Section 120B, IPC, to constitute criminal conspiracy, there must be agreement between two or more persons. The agreement should be to do or cause to be done some illegal act, or some act which is not illegal, by illegal means, provided that where the agreement is other than one to commit an offence, the prosecution must further prove; or (iv) that some act besides the agreement was done by or more of the parties in pursuance of it.

¶60

16fo}ku vf/koDrk ;kphx.k dh vksj ls izLrqr ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; dk U;kf;d n"Vkar Vijay Kumar Ghai & Ors. Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors. (2022) 7 SCC 124 ds ekeys esa /kkjk 405 o 406 rFkk /kkjk 415 o 420 Hkkjrh; n.M lafgrk ds laca/k esa iSjk la[;k 23 yxk;r 32 esa fuEukuqlkj foLrr foospu dj fl)kar izfrikfnr fd;k x;k gS%&

¶61

Section 405 of IPC defines Criminal Breach of Trust which reads as under: -

¶62

“405. Criminal breach of trust.—Whoever, being in any manner entrusted with property, or with any dominion over property, dishonestly misappropriates or converts to his own use that property, or dishonestly uses or disposes of that property in violation of any direction of law prescribing the mode in which such trust is to be discharged, or of any legal contract, express or implied, which he has made touching the discharge of such trust, or wilfully suffers any other person so to do, commits “criminal breach of trust”.

¶63

The essential ingredients of the offense of criminal breach of trust are:- (1) The accused must be entrusted with the property or with dominion over it, (2) The person so entrusted must use that property, or; (3) The accused must dishonestly use or dispose of that property or wilfully suffer any other person to do so in violation, (a) of any direction of law prescribing the mode in which such trust is to be discharged, or; (b) of any legal contract made touching the discharge of such trust.

¶64

“Entrustment” of property under Section 405 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 is pivotal to constitute an offence under this. The words used are, ‘in any manner entrusted with property’. So, it extends to entrustments of all kinds whether to clerks, servants, business partners or other persons, provided they are holding a position of ‘trust’. A person who dishonestly

(8 of 16)

[2024:RJ-JD:31954]

[CRLMP-2912/2023]

misappropriates property entrusted to them contrary to the terms of an obligation imposed is liable for a criminal breach of trust and is punished under Section 406 of the Penal Code.

¶69

The definition in the section does not restrict the property to movables or immoveable alone. This Court in R K Dalmia vs Delhi Administration, (1963) 1 SCR 253 held that the word ‘property’ is used in the Code in a much wider sense than the 14 expression ‘moveable property’. There is no good reason to restrict the meaning of the word ‘property’ to moveable property only when it is used without any qualification in Section 405. 26. In Sudhir Shantilal Mehta Vs. CBI, (2009) 8 SCC 1 it was observed that the act of criminal breach of trust would, Interalia mean using or disposing of the property by a person who is entrusted with or has otherwise dominion thereover. Such an act must not only be done dishonestly but also in violation of any direction of law or any contract express or implied relating to carrying out the trust.

¶70

Section 415 of IPC define cheating which reads as under: - 415. Cheating. —Whoever, by deceiving any person, fraudulently or dishonestly induces the person so deceived to deliver any property to any person, or to consent that any person shall retain any property, or intentionally induces the person so deceived to do or omit to do anything which he would not do or omit if he were not so deceived, and which act or omission causes or is likely to cause damage or harm to that person in body, mind, reputation or property, is said to “cheat”.” The essential ingredients of the offense of cheating are: 1. Deception of any person 2. (a) Fraudulently or dishonestly inducing that person- (i) to deliver any property to any person: or (ii) to consent that any person shall retain any property; or (b) intentionally inducing that person to do or omit to do anything which he would not do or omit if he were no so deceived, and which act or omission causes or is likely to cause damage or harm to that person in body, mind, reputation or property. 28. A fraudulent or dishonest inducement is an essential ingredient of the offence. A person who dishonestly induces another person to deliver any property is liable for the offence of cheating.

¶71

Section 420 IPC defines cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property which reads as under: - “420. Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property. —Whoever cheats and thereby dishonestly induces the person deceived to deliver any property to any person, or to make, alter or destroy the whole or any part of a valuable security, or anything which is signed or sealed, and which is capable of being converted into a valuable security, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.”

(9 of 16)

[2024:RJ-JD:31954]

[CRLMP-2912/2023]

Section 420 IPC is a serious form of cheating that includes inducement (to lead or move someone to happen) in terms of delivery of property as well as valuable securities. This section is also applicable to matters where the destruction of the property is caused by the way of cheating or inducement. Punishment for cheating is provided under this section which may extend to 7 years and also makes the person liable to fine.

¶76

To establish the offence of Cheating in inducing the delivery of property, the following ingredients need to be proved:-

¶77

The representation made by the person was false 2. The accused had prior knowledge that the representation he made was false. 3. The accused made false representation with dishonest intention in order to deceive the person to whom it was made. 4. The act where the accused induced the person to deliver the property or to perform or to abstain from any act which the person would have not done or had otherwise committed.

¶78

As observed and held by this Court in the case of Prof. R.K. Vijayasarathy & Anr. Vs. Sudha Seetharam & Anr., (2019) 16 SCC 739 the ingredients to constitute an offence under Section 420 are as follows:- i) a person must commit the offence of cheating under Section 415; and ii) the person cheated must be dishonestly induced to; a) deliver property to any person; or b) make, alter or destroy valuable security or anything signed or sealed and capable of being converted into valuable security. Thus, cheating is an essential ingredient for an act to constitute an offence under Section 420 IPC.

¶79

17blh izdkj fo}ku vf/koDrk ;kphx.k dh vksj ls izLrqr ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; ds U;kf;d n`"Vkar All Cargo Movers (I) Pvt. Ltd. VS Dhanesh Badarmal Jain, 2007 (14) SCC 776 ds ekeys esa iSjk la[;k 20 esa ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; ds Hira Lal Hari Lal Bhagwati v. CBI, New Delhi, [(2003) 5 SCC 257] esa izfrikfnr fl)kar dk mYys[k fd;k x;k gS] tks fuEukuqlkj gS%&

¶80

“It is settled law, by a catena of decisions, that for establishing the offence of cheating, the complainant is required to show that the accused had fraudulent or dishonest intention at the time of making promise or representation. From his making failure to keep promise subsequently, such a culpable intention right at the beginning that is at the time when the promise was made cannot be presumed. It is seen from the records that the exemption certificate contained necessary conditions which were required to be complied with after importation of the machine. Since the GCS could not comply with it, therefore, it rightly paid the

(10 of 16)

[2024:RJ-JD:31954]

[CRLMP-2912/2023]

necessary duties without taking advantage of the exemption certificate. The conduct of the GCS clearly indicates that there was no fraudulent or dishonest intention of either the GCS or the appellants in their capacities as office-bearers right at the time of making application for exemption. As there was absence of dishonest and fraudulent intention, the question of committing offence under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code does not arise.”

¶85

18bl ekeys esa iqfyl }kjk /kkjk 91 lhvkj-ih-lh- ds rgr fnukad 01-122015 dks eqLrxhl dks uksfVl Hkstk x;k] ftldk tokc fnukad 02-12-2015 dks eqLrxhl }kjk Hkstk x;kA ftlesa ;g fy[kk x;k fd eqLrxhl dh dEiuh b.Ml VsªM o ;kphx.k dh dEiuh G+K Mobelvertriebs ,oa Massivmoebel24.de ds e/; ges'kk gh fcYVh ¼Bill of Lading½ ds vk/kkj ij gh O;kikfjd ysu&nsu gqvk gS rFkk dHkh Hkh Sea way bill ij dke ugha gqvkA fiNys djhc 6 ekg ds lHkh ysu&nsu esa iz;qDr fcfYV;ksa dh lEiw.kZ Nk;kizfr layXu dj iqfyl dks Hksth xbZA tks dkQh ek=k esa fcYVh ¼Bill of Lading½ eqLrxhl dh vksj ls iqfyl dks Hkstk x;k] ftlls ;g Li"V gS fd eqLrxhl dk ysu&nsu vkbZ-Vh 61 o vkbZ-Vh 62 ls iwoZ yxkrkj gksrk jgkA O;kikfjd laca/k eqLrxhl dk igys ls FkkA

¶86

19bl ekeys esa ;g Lohd`r fLFkfr gS fd vkbZ-Vh- 61 ds laca/k esa purchase order Øekad 25003769 fnukad 17&18@06@2015 dk G+K Mobelvertriebs GMBH dk gS] ftldh bUokWbZl vkbZ-Vh- 61@2015&16 fnukafdr 15-10-2015 dks rS;kj dh xbZA vkWMZj esa dqy 175 quantity dk vkWMZj fn;k x;k Fkk] ijarq bUokWbZl ds eqrkfcd 173 quantity gh Hksth xbZ] ftldh dher 45]248 USD Fkk] ftldk QkWeZ , fnukad 24-10-2015 dk gSA ftlesa Hkstus okys dk uke b.Ml VsªM vkSj eky ikus okys dk uke GK Mobelvertriebs GMBH teZuh vkSj means of transport and route ds ckjs esa tks/kiqj ls eqanMk lM+d ds ekxZ ls o eqanMk ls gecxZ] teZuh leqnz ekxZ ls tkus dk mYys[k fd;k gqvk gSA ftlds shipping bill of export dh izfr i=koyh ij miyC/k gSA

¶87

20;g Hkh Lohd`r fLFkfr gS fd vkbZ-Vh- 62 dk purchase order, G+K Mobelvertriebs GMBH dk Øekad 25004244 fnukad 03&04@08@2015 dk gS] ftldh bUokWbZl vkbZ-Vh- 62@2015&16 fnukad 23-10-2015 dh gSA Purchase order esa dqy 313 vkfVZdy dk vkWMZj fn;k x;k Fkk tks 94 USD izfr ;wfuV ds fglkCk ls fn;k x;k FkkA bUokWbZl ds eqrkfcd dqy 276 quantity 94 USD ds fglkc ls HkstokbZ xbZ] ftldh dher 25944 USD Fkh] ftldk QkWeZ , fnukad 26-

(11 of 16)

[2024:RJ-JD:31954]

[CRLMP-2912/2023]

10-2015 dk gSA ftlesa Hkh tks/kiqj ls ewanMk lM+d ekxZ ls o ewanMk ls gecxZ] teZuh leqnz ekxZ ls tkus dk mYys[k gSA ftlds shipping bill of export dh vLi"V izfr i=okyh ij miyC/k gSA

¶92

21bl ekeys esa dfiy tkafxM+ dks Mullar Manuela dh vksj ls 23-102015 dks bZ&esy izkIr gqvk] ftlesa ;g fy[kk fd vc ls Sea way bill fHktok;k tk, rkfd daVsuj iksVZ ls le; ij fy, tk ldsA ftl ij ;kph dfiy tkafxM+ }kjk fnukad 27-10-2015 dks izhre fo'uksbZ eqLrxhl dks esy fy[kk vkSj bldh dkWih b.Ml VªsM dks Hksth] ftlesa Sea way bill ds ckjs esa fy[kk x;kA ftl ij fnukad 30-10-2015 ds bZ&esy esa Ok Procied fy[kdj fHktok;k x;kA

¶93

22Ok Procied ds esy ds laca/k esa eqLrxhl ds lqijokbZtj egsUnz }kjk vius 161 lhvkj-ih-lh- ds c;ku esa ;g esy Hkstuk Lohdkj fd;k gSA ijarq vius c;ku esa ;g crk;k fd Sea way bill ds laca/k esa dEiuh ds ekfyd eqLrxhl dh vuqefr ugha yh xbZ Fkh vkSj mlds }kjk tks Ok Procied fy[kk x;k] og esy ds ckjs esa le> ugha ldk Fkk fcuk le>s gh ;kphx.k ds dgus ls Ok Procied fy[k fn;k x;kA

¶94

23bl ekeys esa fnukad 03-11-2015 dks eqLrxhl dEiuh dks Schneider Geoffrey dk esy Hkstdj eqLrxhl dks ;g fy[kk x;k fd mudk O;olk; vc de gks x;k gSA dksbZ u;k vkWMZj ugha fn;k tkuk gS] blfy, tks 30]000 USD tek gSA mls daVsuj la[;k 25003769 ;kfu vkbZ-Vh 61 bUokWbZl esa ,MtLV djus gsrq fy[kk x;k] ftl esy dk tokc eqLrxhl dh vksj ls fnukad 03-11-2015 dks gh fn;k x;k vkSj ;g fuosnu fd;k x;k fd muds ikl vHkh vkSj vkWMZj izksMD'ku ds ckcr gSa] vafre daVsuj fHktokus ij bls ,MtLV dj fn;k tkosxk vkSj ;g fuosnu fd;k fd bUokWbZl la[;k 25944 ls 10]000 USD ,MtLV dj fy;s tkoasA ftl ij iqu% fnukad 04-11-2015 dks eqLrxhl dks Schneider Geoffrey }kjk bZ&esy Hkstk x;k vkSj ;g fy[kk x;k fd vkidh dEiuh ij vc Hkjkslk ugha gSA mlus viuh dEiuh dks 30]000 USD ,d daVsuj ds cnys ,MtLV u dj 15&15 gtkj USD nks daVsujksa esa ,MtLV djus gsrq dg fn;k gSA

¶95

24ftl esy dk tokc eqLrxhl izhre dh vksj ls Schneider Geoffrey dks ;g fn;k fd mudk lceh'ku ;g gS fd os ykLV vkWMZj esa fMiksftV lSVy djuk pkgrs gSa vkSj ;g fy[kk x;k fd os vius dke esa Qs;j gS ysfdu vkidh

[2024:RJ-JD:31954]

[CRLMP-2912/2023]

(12 of 16)

incompetent team dh otg ls lc gqvk gSA "Any way we respect your decision"A

¶100

25mDr esy ds laca/k esa fo}ku vf/koDrk v;kph }kjk nkSjkus cgl ;g rdZ izLrqr fd;k fd muds }kjk bl esy ds tokc esa 15&15 gtkj nks VqdM+ksa esa fMiksftV 30]000 USD dh ,MtLVesaV dh lgefr ugha nh Fkh cfYd vafre vkns'k ds laca/k esa tks daVsuj Hkstk tkuk Fkk] mlds fy, gh lgefr nh FkhA

¶101

26bl ekeys esa vkWMZj 25004375 o 25004939 ds dSafly djus dh lwpuk fnukad 20-11-2015 dks eqLrxhl izhre fo'uksbZ dks bZesy ds tfj;s nh xbZ FkhA bl lwpuk ds ckn gh fnukad 20-11-2015 dks gh izFke lwpuk fjiksVZ iqfyl Fkkuk ckluh esa ;g eqdnek ntZ djok;k x;k gSA bl ekeys esa ;g Hkh Lohd`r fLFkfr gS fd bUokWbZl vkbZ-Vh- 61 o vkbZ-Vh- 62 ds laca/k esa Director General of Foreign Trade ls Duty Drawback eqLrxhl }kjk izkIr dj fy;k x;k gSA

¶102

27bl ekeys esa iatkc us'kuy cSad dks iqfyl vf/kdkjh dh vksj ls ekflo ekscy dEiuh] teZuh ds }kjk vkbZ-Vh- 61 o vkbZ-Vh- 62 ds laca/k esa fdruh&fdruh jkf'k dc&dc tek djokbZ o fiNys 7 ekg esa fdruh jkf'k muds }kjk tek djokbZ] mldh lwpuk i= Øekad 9396 fnukad 30-11-2015 ds }kjk pkgh xbZ Fkh] tks lwpuk cSad }kjk fnukad 30-11-2015 dks baLisDVj] iqfyl Fkkuk ckluh b.MLVªh;y ,fj;k dks Hksth xbZA ftldh izfr i=koyh esa layXu gS] ftlesa dqy 35 ,UVªh ysu nsu dh gks j[kh gSA ftlesa ,UVªh la[;k 1 ls 20] 22 ls 29 o 31 ls 35 ds laca/k esa bUokWbZl dh fMVsy vafdr gSA ftudk dksbZ fookn ugha gSA Øe la[;k 21 esa fnukad 21-05-2015 dks 29965 USD dh ,UVªh gS] ftlds ckjs esa uks fcy lCehVsM o bUokWbZl fcy ds ckjs esa ,u-,- vafdr gS rFkk Øe la[;k 30 esa USD 41]157-50 vafdr gSA ftlds ckjs eas Hkh uks fcy lCehVsM vafdr gS vkSj bUokWbZl fMVsy esa vkbZ-Vh- 61] 62@15 vafdr gSA

¶103

28nkSjkus cgl bu nksuksa ,UVªh dks tksM+us ls vkbZ-Vh- 61 o 62 bUokWbZl dk ,MtLVesaV gksuk ;kphx.k dh vksj ls crk;k x;k gSA vkbZ-Vh- 61] 45248 USD o vkbZ-Vh- 62] 25]944 USD dk ;ksx djus ls dqy 71]192 USD gksrk gSA ftlesa cSad }kjk Hksts xbZ lwpuk ds Øe la[;k 30 dh jkf'k 41]157-50 USD ?kVkus ls 30]034-50 USD 'ks"k jgrk gS vkSj Øe la[;k 21 esa 29965 USD ,Mokal isVs tek gksus ls ml jkf'k dks blesa ,MtLV djus ij 69-50 USD 'ks"k jguk izrhr gksrk gSA ,slh voLFkk esa vf/kd ls vf/kd bu jkf'k;ksa ds ,MtLVesaV ls 69-50 USD eqLrxhl ds cdk;k gks ldrs gSaA ftlds fy, eqLrxhl l{ke U;k;ky; esa olwyh dh dk;Zokgh dj ldrk gSA

(13 of 16)

[2024:RJ-JD:31954]

[CRLMP-2912/2023]

29bl ekeys esa cgl ds nkSjku v;kph la[;k 2 dh vksj ls ;g rdZ vo'; izLrqr fd;k x;k fd ,Mokal isVs tek jkf'k ml voLFkk esa v;kph la[;k 2 tCr dj ldrk Fkk tc iwoZ esa fn;s x;s vkWMZj tks fujLr fd;s x;s] mlls v;kph dks uqdlku gqvkA fcYVh ¼Bill of Lading½ lh/ks dEiuh dks Hksts tkus ls muds }kjk vkbZ-Vh- 61 o vkbZ-Vh- 62 dk eky NqM+ok fy;k vkSj ,Mokal jkf'k dks ,MtLV djus ij etcwj fd;kA bl laca/k esa v;kph la[;k 2 dh vksj ls viuh izFke lwpuk fjiksVZ esa dksbZ vk/kkj ugha fy;k x;kA dsoy cgl dh LVst ij gh fo}ku vf/koDrk }kjk ;g vk/kkj fy;k x;k] tks ckn esa lkspdj fy;k x;k vk/kkj izrhr gksrk gSA

¶108

30okLro esa bl ekeys esa ;kph dh vksj ls vkWMZj dSafly gksus ds mijkar gh eqLrxhl }kjk izFke lwpuk fjiksVZ ntZ djokbZ xbZ ;fn cdk;k vkWMZj dk eky teZu dEiuh }kjk ys fy;k tkrk ml voLFkk esa laHkor% ;g izdj.k gh eqLrxhl dh vksj ls ntZ ugha djok;k tkrkA bl ekeys esa i{kdkjku ds e/; vkbZ-Vh- 61 o vkbZVh- 62 ls iwoZ ls gh O;kikfjd laca/k jgs vkSj eky Hkstk x;k ftudk Hkqxrku gqvk ,slh voLFkk esa vkjEHk ls gh ;kphx.k dh ea'kk /kks[kk nsus dh gksuk izFke n"V;k gh izrhr ugha gksrk vkSj vkbZ-Vh- 61 o vkbZ-Vh 62 ds isVs jde eqLrxhl dks vnk dh tk pqdh gS] ,sls esa vekur esa [;kur gksuk izFke n"V;k gh izrhr ugha gksrkA bl ekeys esa iwoZ esa izLrqr U;kf;d n`"Vkarksa esa izfrikfnr fl)karksa ds ifjizs{; esa /kkjk 420] 406] 120ch Hkkjrh; n.M lafgrk ds vijk/k ds rRo fo|eku gksuk izrhr ugha gksrs gSaA dsoy ek= iwoZ esa fn, x, vkWMZj fujLr gks gksus ls ukjktxhol gh izFke lwpuk fjiksVZ ntZ djokbZ tkuk bl ekeys esa izrhr gksrk gSA

¶109

31fo}ku vf/koDrk ;kphx.k dh vksj ls izLrqr vkWy dkWxksZ ewolZ ¼iwokZsDr½ ds ekeys esa Hkh gLrxr ekeys ls feyrk&tqyrs rF; FksA vkWy dkxksZ ewolZ ¼iwoksZDr½ ds iSjk la[;k 2] 3] 12] 13] 16 o 21 esa fuEukuqlkj foospu fd;k x;k gS%&

¶110

2.The parties hereto entered into a contract of carriage. First Respondent approached the appellants which are companies registered and incorporated under the Indian Companies Act for delivery of six consignments valued at US $ 98,715.29 to the original consignee, M/s. Universal Apparels (EPZ), Mombassa, Kenya. By reason of a fax message, Appellants asked their counterparts in Mombassa, Kenya (Walford Meadows) to confirm delivery of consignment asking it to see that the cargo is delivered only against presentation of original Bills of Lading. The goods in question were said to have been delivered by the

(14 of 16)

[2024:RJ-JD:31954]

[CRLMP-2912/2023]

agent of the petitioner to the original consignee but the same allegedly was rejected on the ground of being inferior in quality. Goods are said to have been delivered to M/s. Fashionette Industries Ltd. Complainant-Respondent issued a notice to the accused persons as also the aforementioned Walford Meadows and M/s. Universal Apparels stating :

¶115

“That with utter disregard to the procedures and practice prevalent internationally, and being fully conscious of the consequences of delivering the consignments without production of the Bills of Lading, you M/s. Walford Meadows Ltd., as agents of the Carrier at Mombassa Ltd. effected delivery of the consignments covered under the aforesaid original bills of lading to the consignees, without their producing the Bills of Lading. That my clients are shocked at your act of negligence, which is contrary, violative and in breach of your duties under the Contract and Law.”

¶116

3.Negligence was, thus, attributed to the agencies in delivering the cargo without the original Bill of Lading. It was also alleged that the carriers and their agent have committed a breech of carriage and acted in violation of their contract and obligation. A claim for a sum of US$ 84,353.31 was made. In the said notice, it was stated :

¶117

“That you, M/s. Walford Meadows, sent a fax dated 19.9.1996 to M/s Universal Apparels, copy of which was faxed to my clients by you M/s All Cargo Movers (India) Pvt. Ltd. By the said fax, you M/s Walford Meadows Ltd. have clearly pointed out the procedures to be followed in respect of Through Bills of Lading or House Bills of Lading and have admitted that no cargo should be released to the importer without the presentation of the original Bills of Lading. That you, M/s. Walford have gone one step further and stated that you had delivered the consignments to Universal Apparels as a favour, since Universal Apparels were your regular customers etc. etc. and lodged a claim for the value of the said consignments being the amount they have been debited with you, M/ s. All Cargo.”

¶118

12.Agent of the Kenyan counterpart of the petitioner, namely M/s. Walford Meadows Ltd. against whom allegations have been made that it had delivered the consignments to the assignee without original bills of lading had not been made an accused.

¶119

13.A bare perusal of the complaint petition would show that it did not contain any averment in regard to the ingredients of the offence under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code. There is no allegation that it was the petitioner who had delivered the goods.

(15 of 16)

[2024:RJ-JD:31954]

[CRLMP-2912/2023]

16.We are of the opinion that the allegations made in the complaint petition, even if given face value and taken to be correct in its entirety, do not disclose an offence. For the said purpose, This Court may not only take into consideration the admitted facts but it is also permissible to look into the pleadings of the plaintiffrespondent No.1 in the suit. No allegation whatsoever was made against the appellants herein in the notice. What was contended was negligence and/or breach of contract on the part of the carriers and their agent. Breach of contract simplicitor does not constitute an offence. For the said purpose, allegations in the complaint petition must disclose the necessary ingredients therefor. Where a civil suit is pending and the complaint petition has been filed one year after filing of the civil suit, we may for the purpose of finding out as to whether the said allegations are prima facie cannot notice the correspondences exchanged by the parties and other admitted documents. It is one thing to say that the Court at this juncture would not consider the defence of the accused but it is another thing to say that for exercising the inherent jurisdiction of this Court, it is impermissible also to look to the admitted documents. Criminal proceedings should not be encouraged, when it is found to be mala fide or otherwise an abuse of the process of the Court. Superior Courts while exercising this power should also strive to serve the ends of justice.

¶124

21.For the reasons aforementioned, the impugned judgment cannot be sustained. It is set aside accordingly. Appeal is allowed and the order taking cognizance against the appellant is set aside.

¶125

32mDr ekeys esa Hkh /kkjk 420] 406 Hkkjrh; n.M lafgrk dk vijk/k ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; }kjk izekf.kr ugha ekuk x;k vkSj izlaKku vkns'k dks fujLr fd;k x;kA ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; ds iwoZ esa of.kZr U;kf;d n`"Vkar ujs'k dqekj ¼iwoksZDr½ esa izfrikfnr fl)karksa ds ifjizs{; esa ;g ,slk ekeyk gS] tks abuse of process of court dh Js.kh esa vkrk gSA ,sls ekeyksa dks v/khuLFk U;k;ky; esa yafcr j[ks tkus o fopkj.k dh dk;Zokgh fd;k tkuk fof/klEer izrhr ugha gksrk gS vkSj ,sls ekeys esa /kkjk 482 lhvkj-ih-lh- ds vf/kdkjksa dk mi;ksx dj izdj.k esa yafcr dk;Zokfg;ksa dks fujLr fd;k tkuk U;k;ksfpr izrhr gksrk gSA

¶126

33vr% ;kphx.k dh vksj ls izLrqr ;kfpdk vUrxZr /kkjk 482 lhvkj-ihlh- Lohdkj dh tkdj v/khuLFk U;k;ky; egkuxj eftLVªsV la[;k 4] tks/kiqj egkuxj ds le{k yafcr izdj.k la[;k 53@23] LVsV cuke dfiy tkafxM oxSjk] izFke lwpuk fjiksVZ la[;k 319@2015] iqfyl Fkkuk ckluh dh dk;Zokfg;ka fujLr dh

¶127

(16 of 16) [CRLMP-2912/2023]

¶128

[2024:RJ-JD:31954]

¶129

tkrh gSA vfHk;qDrx.k&;kphx.k dks fMLpktZ fd;k tkrk gSA vfHk;qDrx.k dh mifLFkfr ckcr izLrqr tekur eqpyds fujLr fd, tkrs gSaA

¶130

34vkns'k dh ,d izfr fo}ku fopkj.k U;k;ky; dks Hksth tkosA LFkxu izkFkZuk&i= Hkh fuLrkfjr le>k tkosA

¶131

(YOGENDRA KUMAR PUROHIT),J

¶132

11-mayank/-

Kapil Jangid v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kapil Jangid v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dasrath Vs State of Rajasthan

Ajay Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Dhanvantri Joshi Vs State of Rajasthan

Sidhant Bhatia Vs State of Rajasthan

Sidhant Bhatia Vs State of Rajasthan

State of Rajasthan Vs Hemlata Kankariya