Judicial Dictionary - C
On a critical analysis of the definition of 'cheating' as given in Section 415 of the Penal Code, it appears that the ingredients required to constitute the offence of 'cheating' are as follows: "(i) There should be fraudulent or dishonest inducement of a person by deceiving him; (ii) (a) the person so deceive should be induced to deliver any property to any person, or to consent that any person shall retain any property; or (b) the person so deceived should be intentionally induced to do or omit to do anything which he would not do or omit if he were not so deceived; and (iii) in cases covered by (ii) (b), the act or omission should be one which causes or is likely to cause damage or harm to the person induced in body, mind, reputation or property.(Ram Das Vs. State of UP AIR 1974 SC 1811). ... In the decision in the case of Mahbubul Alam Gazi alias Mahbub Alam Vs. State, reported in 8 BLT 358 = 5 BLC 380, referred to by the learned Advocate for the petitioner, it has been held: "In order to constitute the offence of cheating, it must be established that someone is made to part with some property on the promise or representation of the accused to return something in lieu thereof, which the latter had no intention to give. The initial intention to deceive must be established to justify a conviction for cheating. Intention of cheating shall have to be gathered from the facts of the case and its surrounding circumstances. Where there is no fraudulent intention of the accused from the beginning, there can be no question of cheating. In the absence ofmens rea, mere breach of contract cannot constitute cheating. Inability to fulfill a promise or contract does not amount to cheating."
(64 DLR (HCD) (2012) 146)
|Created On||June 11, 2014, 2:18 AM|