Calcutta High Court | While deciding a revision petition, Tirthankar Ghosh*, J. held that no offence under Ss. 417 and 426 of the Penal Code, 1860 can be made out from the alleged transactions and a case for recovery can be made out from nature of such transactions, cloaking any criminal proceeding.
In the instant matter, the opposite party after being the background, proof of identity of residents and sources of income of the petitioner issue a Credit Card with a Credit Limit of Rs. 12,294,960/-. The opposite party alleged that the petitioner had created a fake impression upon the bank that he was a person of repute having permanent place of residence and financial capacity to timely repay after issuance of the said corporate credit card. Upon failing to repay money, the opposite party filed a complaint under Ss. 420 and 406 IPC which is pending before the Metropolitan Magistrate, Calcutta. The petitioner filed the present revision application challenging the criminal proceedings arising out of the impugned complaint.
The Court observed that the purpose for filing the impugned complaint is to recover the outstanding arrears/interest of Rs.1 crore and no offence under Ss. 417 and 426 IPC can be made out from the transactions.
The Court held that from the alleged nature of transaction in the present matter, a case for recovery is made out giving cloak to any criminal proceeding.
“It is a settled proposition of law that mere breach of agreement or contract do not give rise to a cause of action for criminal breach of trust, particularly, in the present case when the parties have continuously transacted amongst themselves.”
[Rishipal Ruhil v. Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd., 2023 SCC OnLine Cal 285, decided on 06-02-2023]
*Judgment by Justice Tirthankar Ghosh
Advocates who appeared in this case :
Mr. Bharat Chugh and Ms. Priyanka Agarwal, Counsel for the Petitioners;
Mr. A. Dutta and Mr. Z. Saltan, Counsel for the Opposite Party.
*Ritu Singh, Editorial Assistant has put this report together