Case Has Traits Of Civil Dispute: Punjab & Haryana High Court Asks Police To Stop Registering FIRs In Civil Matters [Read Order]

"It is being noticed that in number of cases involving pure and simple money recovery, specific performance issues or such like matters, FIRs are being registered by the police authorities. In order to avoid harassment in the matters involving civil disputes, it is need of the hour that the police department at the appropriate level, looks into the process of registering FIR, especially in matters having tone of civil dispute," the Bench of Justice Avneesh Jhingan said.

Justice Jhingan asserted that civil disputes are often painted as criminal acts, with an endeavour to somehow "wriggle the other party in the criminal proceedings for applying pressure to settle the issue."

The Bench was hearing a petition seeking relief against an order of the Sessions Court, dismissing the anticipatory bail plea of the Petitioner herein.

The Petitioner had been booked under the offences of Cheating and Criminal Breach of Trust, in connection to execution of a sale agreement.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the Court asserted that the dispute has "traits of a civil dispute" and the Complainant cannot allege cheating or criminal breach of trust against the Petitioner on the basis of an agreement to sell.

Reliance was placed on Hridaya Ranjan Pd. Verma & Ors. v. State of Bihar & Anr., 2000(2) RCR (Crl) 484, whereby it was held,

"In determining the question it has to be kept in mind that the distinction between mere breach of contract and the offence of cheating is a fine one. It depends upon the intention of the accused at the time of inducement which may be judged by his subsequent conduct but for this subsequent conduct is not the sole test. Mere breach of contract cannot give rise to criminal prosecution for cheating unless fraudulent or dishonest intention is shown right at the beginning of the transaction, that is the time when the offence is said to have been committed. Therefore, it is the intention which is the gist of the offence. To hold a person guilty of cheating it is necessary to show that he had fraudulent or dishonest intention at the time of making the promise. From his mere failure to keep up promise subsequently such a culpable intention right at the beginning that is, when he made the promise cannot be presumed."

"The petitioner was never a party to said agreement to sell," the Bench further observed while granting protection from arrest, subject to the Petitioner's joining the investigation within two weeks.

Case Title: Manjit Kaur v. State of Punjab

Click Here To Download Order

Read Order