Non-Disclosure Of Marital Status Without Deception Or Dishonest Inducement Not Cheating U/S 420 IPC: Chhattisgarh High Court
The Chhattisgarh High Court has held that mere allegations of non-disclosure of a material fact relating to matrimonial status, without the necessary ingredients of deception and dishonest inducement, do not constitute cheating under Section 420 IPC. The Court observed that where the essential ingredients of the offences alleged are not made out, continuation of criminal proceedings would amount to abuse of the process of the Court.
A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal was hearing a petition filed seeking quashing of the order dated July 24, 2024 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, directing registration of offences under Sections 420 and 494 IPC. The petitioner and respondent No.2 had solemnized their marriage, while the petitioner had an earlier marriage in respect of which divorce proceedings were pending, and a decree of divorce was subsequently passed by the Family Court. The petitioner contended that respondent No.2 was fully aware of her earlier matrimonial status and the pending proceedings and, therefore, there was no concealment, deception or dishonest inducement on her part.
The Court noted that the prosecution case proceeded on the premise that, on the date of the marriage with respondent No.2, the petitioner's earlier marriage was subsisting and that she had concealed this fact. However, the Court observed that for constituting the offence of cheating under Section 420 IPC, the prosecution was required to disclose the essential element of deception and dishonest or fraudulent inducement resulting in delivery of property or alteration or destruction of a valuable security.
“Mere allegation that a material fact relating to the matrimonial status was not disclosed, without the necessary ingredients of deception and dishonest inducement, would not by itself constitute an offence under Section 420 IPC,” the Court remarked.
The Court referred to the Supreme Court's decision in Hridaya Ranjan Prasad Verma v. State of Bihar, wherein it was held that the essential ingredient of cheating is deception and dishonest inducement, and that a mere breach of promise or failure to fulfil an obligation does not constitute cheating unless fraudulent or dishonest intention existed from the inception.
So far as Section 494 IPC was concerned, the Court noted that the prosecution must establish the subsistence of the first valid marriage as well as the valid solemnization of the subsequent marriage.
“… we are of the considered opinion that the essential ingredients of Sections 420 and 494 IPC are not made out against the petitioner. The continuation of the criminal proceedings, in the facts and circumstances of the case, would therefore serve no useful purpose and would amount to abuse of the process of the Court,” the Court observed.
The Court further held that the contention of there being an alternative remedy cannot be accepted as an absolute bar to exercise of the inherent jurisdiction of this Court where the basic ingredients of the alleged offences are absent.
The Court accordingly allowed the petition and quashed the order dated July 24, 2024.
Case Title: Rashi Sharma v. State of Chhattisgarh [CRMP No. 1557 of 2025]