P ESWARA REDDY Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application under S. 482, Cr.P.C. for quashing the proceedings in C.C. No. 74 of 1984 on the file of the XI Metropolitan Magistrate, Secunderabad. The petitioner has been charge-sheeted under S. 420, I.P.C. on the following facts.

(2.) It is alleged that the petitioner came to the complainants shop (some time in February, 1983) and he agreed to purchase a Ashok Leyland Vehicle. As per the terms of the contract, the petitioner-accused paid a sum of Rs. 26,462.30 Ps. being 10% of the total cost of the vehicle and the petitioner promised to pay balance of 90% of the consideration later on. The petitioner was given possession of the vehicle in March 1983. Subsequently after three months, the petitioner is alleged to have come to the seller and represented that due to non-availability of F form and the sale-letter from the sellers, the petitioner was unable to register the vehicle and that he could not arrange finance from the Bank. It is stated that on good faith and as a special case, the sellers issued F form and the sale-letter to the petitioner. It is then stated that on 9th of September 1983, the petitioner gave a cheque bearing No. 901535 for an amount of Rs. 38,500.00 and that when the cheque was presented, it was dishonoured. It is further stated that during the course of investigation, L.Ws. 1 to 7 were examined and their statements recorded and that the investigation disclosed that the accused falsely represented to the complainant and obtained F form and sale-letter from him and also gave a cheque knowing that there was no balance in his account. Thus, it is stated that the accused committed an offence punishable under S. 420, I.P.C.

(3.) In this application, it is contended by the learned counsel for the accused-petitioner Sri C. Padmanabha Reddy that on a reading of the charge sheet, no offence under S. 420, I.P.C. is made out. He has relied upon certain rulings of various Courts to show that once a debt is incurred or property is parted with in favour of the accused and no dishonest intention is alleged at that stage merely because a cheque was subsequently issued and the same was dishonoured, does not amount to cheating either under S. 420 or under S. 415 I.P.C.