IPC Section 409 — Criminal breach of trust by public servant, banker or agent

Judgments citing IPC Section 409

1. State vs G.Pochaiah & Ors on 20 June, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana20 Jun 2023

   Case Name: State vs G.Pochaiah & Ors on 20 June, 2023 Court: The High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 20 June, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice K.Surender Subject: Criminal Appeal, Prevention of Corruption Act, Indian Penal Code Key Legal Propositions 1. An appellate court should only overturn a trial court’s acquittal if there are “very substantial and compelling reasons” to do so. 2. If two reasonable views are possible – one leading to acquittal and the other to conviction – the appellate court must rule in favour of the accused. 3. The trial court’s finding of facts should be given due weight and consideration, and reversed only if demonstrably wrong or based on an erroneous view of law. Judgment Summary Background: The State of Telangana filed a Criminal Appeal (No. 1382 of 2007) challenging the acquittal of several accused officers by the Principal Special Judge for SPE & ACB Cases, Hyderabad. The charges related to alleged forgery and fabrication of documents to claim duty allowance for non-working Home Guards between March 1994 and August 1994, causing wrongful loss to the Government under Sections 13(1)(c) and 13(1)(d)(i)(ii) & (iii) r/w 13(2)

2. The State of Telangana vs A. Narsing & Others on 15 June, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana15 Jun 2023

   Case Name: The State of Telangana vs A. Narsing & Others on 15 June, 2023 Court: High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 15 June, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice K. Surender Subject: Criminal Appeal – Section 409 & 120 IPC – Misappropriation – Cheating – ISD Telephone Fraud Key Legal Propositions 1. To establish an offence under Section 409 IPC, there must be entrustment of property, which was criminally misappropriated. Mere failure to pay bills does not constitute entrustment. 2. An offence of cheating requires deliberate misrepresentation and inducement to part with property; these elements were absent in the present case. 3. Appellate courts should be reluctant to reverse trial court acquittals unless there are very substantial and compelling reasons to do so, particularly when evidence has been carefully analyzed. Judgment Summary Background: The appeal arose from the judgment of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Tandur, acquitting accused A1 to A6 charged under Sections 409 and 120 IPC. The prosecution alleged that the accused, employees of a telephone exchange, facilitated illegal ISD calls, suppressing meter readings and causing a loss of appro

3. State rep. By Inspector of Police, Anti-Corruption Bureau, City Range, Hyderabad vs Sri G.Pochaiah & Ors. on 20 June, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana20 Jun 2023

   Case Name: State rep. By Inspector of Police, Anti-Corruption Bureau, City Range, Hyderabad vs Sri G.Pochaiah & Ors. on 20 June, 2023 Court: The High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 20 June, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice K.Surender Subject: Criminal Law – Prevention of Corruption Act – Appeal against Acquittal – Evidence Analysis – Scope of Interference with Trial Court’s Decision Key Legal Propositions 1. An appellate court should be slow in reversing an order of acquittal, particularly when the trial court has analyzed the evidence. The order of acquittal creates a presumption of innocence. 2. An appellate court can only overturn a trial court’s acquittal if there are “very substantial and compelling reasons” to do so, such as a palpably wrong finding of fact, an erroneous view of law, or a likely miscarriage of justice. 3. If a reasonable view can be reached leading to either acquittal or conviction, the appellate court must rule in favor of the accused. Judgment Summary Background: The State of Telangana filed a Criminal Appeal challenging the acquittal of several accused individuals by the Principal Special Judge for SPE & ACB Cases, Hyderabad.

4. Union of India vs Y. Vijaya on 18 April, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana18 Apr 2023

   Case Name: Union of India vs Y. Vijaya on 18 April, 2023 Court: The High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 18 April, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice Abhinand Kumar Shavili and Sri Justice Pulla Karthik Subject: Writ Appeal – Rejection of candidature for Constable post due to past criminal case – Consideration of Acquittal – Principles of Natural Justice. Key Legal Propositions 1. An employer must consider the specific circumstances when assessing information regarding a candidate’s criminal history, particularly the nature of the offense and the outcome of the case. 2. A mere rejection of candidature without assigning reasons is unsustainable and requires re-examination in light of established legal principles and guidelines. 3. While a clean acquittal is preferable, an acquittal based on benefit of doubt should also be considered by the employer, along with other relevant factors, before rejecting a candidate. Judgment Summary Background: The Writ Appeal arises from a challenge to a Single Judge’s order setting aside the rejection of a candidate (Respondent) for a Constable post in the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF). The Respondent was prov

5. D Srinivasa Rao vs The State of Telangana on 24 April, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana24 Apr 2023

   Case Name: D Srinivasa Rao vs The State of Telangana on 24 April, 2023 Court: High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 24 April, 2023 Bench: Justice Abhinand Kumar Shavili & Justice Pulla Karthik Subject: Service Law – Suspension – Disciplinary Proceedings – Review of Suspension Order – Period of Suspension – Transfer during Suspension Key Legal Propositions 1. Prolonged suspension of an employee, exceeding six years, is arbitrary in the absence of demonstrable public interest or ongoing disciplinary proceedings. 2. Transferring a suspended employee does not negate the need for a review of the suspension order, particularly considering the length of suspension. 3. Authorities must review suspension orders in accordance with established rules and relevant precedents, considering all attendant circumstances. Judgment Summary Background: The appellant, a Joint Commissioner of State GST, was placed under suspension in 2017 following the registration of a criminal case and initiation of disciplinary proceedings alleging financial irregularities. Despite a prior direction from the Court to review the suspension order, it was repeatedly extended. The appe

6. Jetti Rosa Rao vs The State of A P on 18 December, 2023

   High Court of Andhra Pradesh18 Dec 2023

   Case Name: Jetti Rosa Rao vs The State of A P on 18 December, 2023 Court: High Court of Andhra Pradesh :: Amaravati Date of Judgment: 18 December, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice K. Sreenivasa Reddy Subject: Criminal Appeal – Prevention of Corruption Act, Indian Penal Code – Conspiracy, Forgery, Abuse of Official Position, Wrongful Loss to Government. Key Legal Propositions 1. Evidence of bank account opening by the complainant does not automatically negate the claim of forgery and fraudulent withdrawal of funds if the signatures on crucial documents are proven to be dissimilar to the complainant’s genuine signatures. 2. Corroborative evidence, such as attendance registers and appointment letters, is crucial in establishing the employment status of an individual and supporting claims of fraudulent representation. 3. Weak and uncorroborated defense evidence, lacking supporting documentation, is insufficient to rebut strong prosecution evidence establishing a criminal conspiracy and fraudulent practices. Judgment Summary Background: This Criminal Appeal arises from a conviction and sentencing under Sections 13(1)(c) and 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, and Sections 1

7. State of Andhra Pradesh vs. Margadarsi Chit Funds Private Limited on 20 October, 2023

   High Court of Andhra Pradesh20 Oct 2023

   Case Name: State of Andhra Pradesh vs. Margadarsi Chit Funds Private Limited on 20 October, 2023 Court: High Court of Andhra Pradesh Date of Judgment: 20 October, 2023 Bench: U.Durga Prasad Rao, A.V. Ravindra Babu Subject: Criminal Procedure, Writ Appeal, Section 102 CrPC, Freezing of Bank Accounts, Intra-Court Appeal, Jurisdiction Key Legal Propositions 1. An intra-court writ appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent is not maintainable if the impugned order was passed in a criminal case exercising criminal jurisdiction. 2. The nature of the order (civil or criminal) is determined by the field of jurisdiction exercised, not merely by the procedural mechanism (e.g., quashing of FIR vs. Section 482 CrPC). 3. The availability of an alternative remedy under Section 451/457 CrPC does not preclude the High Court from exercising its plenary jurisdiction under Article 226 when fundamental rights are affected. Judgment Summary Background: This intra-court writ appeal arises from an order passed by a learned single judge suspending a notice under Section 102 CrPC, which froze three bank accounts of Margadarsi Chit Fund Private Limited during a police investigation into a cheating c

8. Petitioner vs Respondent on 21 July, 2023

   High Court of Andhra Pradesh21 Jul 2023

   Case Name: Court: Date of Judgment: Bench: Subject: Key Legal Propositions 1. Upon the death of an accused during the pendency of a criminal revision, the revision petition abates. 2. Confirmation of conviction and sentence by a higher court does not preclude the effect of the accused’s death on pending revision petitions. 3. Pending miscellaneous applications are dismissed upon disposal of the primary revision petition. Judgment Summary Background: The petitioner/accused No.1 filed a Criminal Revision against a judgment confirming conviction and sentence under Sections 409, 420, and 120B of the Indian Penal Code. Subsequently, the petitioner/accused No.1 died on 03.01.2020. Held: A. On Abatement of Revision Petition due to Death of Accused: Majority View: The Court held that in light of the petitioner/accused No.1’s death, the Criminal Revision Petition is disposed of. Dissenting View: None. B. On Pending Miscellaneous Applications: Majority View: The Court directed that any pending miscellaneous applications be dismissed as a consequence of the disposal of the revision petition. Dissenting View: None. C. On Confirmation of Conviction: Majority View: The Court did not address

9. State Of Chhattisgarh vs Farukh Dhebar on 30 October, 2023

   High Court of Chhattisgarh30 Oct 2023

   Case Name: State Of Chhattisgarh vs Farukh Dhebar on 30 October, 2023 Court: HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Date of Judgment: 30.10.2023 Bench: Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput Subject: Criminal Law – Section 409 IPC – Acquittal – Appeal – Criminal Breach of Trust – Evidence – Appreciation of Evidence Key Legal Propositions 1. To establish an offence under Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code, the prosecution must prove entrustment of property and misappropriation thereof with cogent and prudent evidence. 2. An acquittal based on a reasonable doubt, after proper appreciation of evidence, should not be lightly interfered with by an appellate court. 3. Where two views are possible on the evidence, the view favouring the accused should be accepted. Judgment Summary Background: The State of Chhattisgarh filed an appeal under Section 378(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, challenging the acquittal of the respondent/accused by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Baikunthpur, for an offence punishable under Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution alleged that the accused had misappropriated a portion of funds received after encashing a cheque.

10. Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd vs Hassad Food Company Q S C & Ors on 12 December, 2023

    High Court of Delhi12 Dec 2023

    Case Name: Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd vs Hassad Food Company Q S C & Ors on 12 December, 2023 Court: High Court of Delhi Date of Judgment: 12.12.2023 Bench: Hon’ble Mr Justice Vibhu Bakhru, Hon’ble Mr Justice Amit Mahajan Subject: Civil Appeal, Corporate Guarantee, Fraud, Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 Key Legal Propositions 1. A civil court’s jurisdiction to entertain a suit by a borrower against a bank is not ousted by the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993. 2. Proceedings under the RDB Act should not be impeded by a parallel civil suit, and both can proceed independently. 3. Mere negligence of banks in monitoring inventory does not, *prima facie*, constitute fraud inducing investment in a company. Judgment Summary Background: The appellant, Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd, appealed against an order restraining coercive recovery actions against Hassad Foods, pending resolution of a suit alleging fraud and misrepresentation related to a corporate guarantee. Hassad Foods claimed the banks concealed the poor financial health of Bush Foods, inducing them to issue the guarantee. The DRT had issued a Recovery Certificate against Hassad Foods, which was unsuccessfully cha

11. Central Bureau of Investigation vs Kapil Wadhawan & Anr. on 30 May, 2023

    High Court of Delhi30 May 2023

    Case Name: Central Bureau of Investigation vs Kapil Wadhawan & Anr. on 30 May, 2023 Court: High Court of Delhi Date of Judgment: 30 May, 2023 Bench: Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma Subject: Criminal Law, Bail, Section 167 CrPC, Default Bail, Investigation, Completion of Investigation Key Legal Propositions 1. Completion of investigation, and not merely filing of a chargesheet, is the prerequisite for denying default bail under Section 167(2) CrPC. 2. A chargesheet filed without completing the investigation, particularly concerning all named accused and relevant offenses, is considered incomplete for the purpose of Section 167(2) CrPC. 3. Courts must prioritize protecting the fundamental right to personal liberty and interpret penal statutes in a manner that safeguards the rights of the accused. Judgment Summary Background: The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) filed a petition seeking quashing of an order granting default bail to Kapil Wadhawan and Dheeraj Wadhawan, accused in a case involving alleged financial fraud and misappropriation of funds amounting to approximately Rs. 34,000 Crores. The CBI argued that the chargesheet was filed within the stipulated time and therefor

12. NAYATI HEALTHCARE AND RESEARCH NCR PVT. LTD. AND ORS. vs UNION OF INDIA MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS AND ANR. on 11 October, 2023

    High Court of Delhi11 Oct 2023

    Case Name: NAYATI HEALTHCARE AND RESEARCH NCR PVT. LTD. AND ORS. vs UNION OF INDIA MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS AND ANR. on 11 October, 2023 Court: High Court of Delhi Date of Judgment: 11th October, 2023 Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Amit Bansal Subject: Prevention of Money Laundering Act, Quashing of Complaint, Predicate Offence, Finality of Order Key Legal Propositions 1. An offence under Section 3 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) is contingent upon the existence of a scheduled offence and cannot proceed on a notional basis. 2. If a predicate offence is finally quashed by a competent court, the offence of money laundering linked to it cannot survive. 3. The finality of an order quashing a predicate offence is crucial; if unchallenged, it precludes the continuation of proceedings under PMLA. Judgment Summary Background: The petitioners sought quashing of a complaint filed by the Directorate of Enforcement (ED) under Section 3 of the PMLA, based on an ECIR stemming from a previously filed FIR alleging embezzlement and misappropriation. The FIR was quashed by a Coordinate Bench after a settlement and issuance of a No Dues Certificate from Yes Bank. The ED argue

13. Manu Prashant Wig vs State (NCT of Delhi) on 11 December, 2023

    High Court of Delhi11 Dec 2023

    Case Name: Manu Prashant Wig vs State (NCT of Delhi) on 11 December, 2023 Court: High Court of Delhi Date of Judgment: 11 December, 2023 Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amit Sharma Subject: Criminal Law – Bail Application – Economic Offences – Fraud – Investment Schemes Key Legal Propositions 1. The grant of bail is governed by principles considering the nature of accusation, severity of punishment, potential for tampering with evidence, likelihood of abscondence, character of the accused, and public interest. 2. A history of non-cooperation with investigation and attempts to evade legal proceedings are strong factors against the grant of bail. 3. Evidence of personal benefit derived from alleged fraudulent activities and involvement in similar offences weigh against the applicant’s plea for bail. Judgment Summary Background: The present application is a petition for regular bail under Section 439 of the CrPC in connection with FIR No. 0028/2020, registered under Sections 409/420/120B of the IPC and Sections 3/4/6 of the PCMC Act. The allegations pertain to a fraudulent investment scheme operated by M/s Bluefox Motion Pictures Pvt. Ltd., inducing investors with promises of high re

14. Dr. Balwinder Kumar Sharma vs. State of UT Chandigarh on 14 December, 2023

    High Court of Delhi14 Dec 2023

    Case Name: Dr. Balwinder Kumar Sharma vs. State of UT Chandigarh on 14 December, 2023 Court: High Court of Delhi Date of Judgment: 14 December, 2023 Bench: Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma Subject: Criminal Revision Petition – Framing of Charges – Prevention of Corruption Act – Evidence – Prima Facie Case – Application of Mind Key Legal Propositions 1. At the stage of framing of charges, the Court must apply its mind to the material on record to determine if a prima facie case exists, but should not conduct a mini-trial. 2. The Court, while considering framing of charges, can sift and weigh evidence for the limited purpose of finding out whether a prima facie case has been made out. 3. In cases involving criminal conspiracy, direct evidence may be lacking, necessitating reliance on circumstantial evidence and a consideration of broad probabilities. Judgment Summary Background: The present petition challenges the order dated 31.01.2020, framing charges against the petitioner, Dr. Balwinder Kumar Sharma, in connection with allegations of leaking the Haryana Civil Services (Judicial Branch) Preliminary Examination, 2017. The case originated from a fact-finding inquiry and subsequent

15. CA Subodh Maheshwari vs Institute of Chartered Accountants of India & Anr. on 18 December, 2023

    High Court of Delhi18 Dec 2023

    Case Name: CA Subodh Maheshwari vs Institute of Chartered Accountants of India & Anr. on 18 December, 2023 Court: High Court of Delhi Date of Judgment: 18 December, 2023 Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Subramonium Prasad Subject: Professional Misconduct, Chartered Accountants Act, Disciplinary Proceedings, Writ Petition Key Legal Propositions 1. Disciplinary proceedings against a Chartered Accountant must adhere to the procedure laid down in the Conduct Rules, ensuring proper notice and opportunity to be heard. 2. Courts exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 should primarily focus on the fairness of the decision-making process in disciplinary matters, rather than substituting their own judgment on the merits of the case. 3. The quantum of punishment in disciplinary proceedings is within the domain of the disciplinary authority, and courts should only interfere if the penalty is shockingly disproportionate. Judgment Summary Background: The Petitioner challenged orders passed by the Appellate Authority, ICAI, removing his name from the Register of Members for nine months and imposing a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/-. This followed a finding of professional misconduct by the Disciplin

16. Chitra Ramkrishna vs Assistant Director, Enforcement Directorate on 09 February, 2023

    High Court of Delhi9 Feb 2023

    Case Name: Chitra Ramkrishna vs Assistant Director, Enforcement Directorate on 09 February, 2023 Court: High Court of Delhi Date of Judgment: 09 February, 2023 Bench: Justice Jasmeet Singh Subject: Bail Application under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) Key Legal Propositions 1. For an offence under Section 72 of the Information Technology Act, 2000, the accused must be acting pursuant to powers conferred under the Act or its rules. 2. Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code is not a standalone scheduled offence under PMLA but is read with other offences like Section 420 IPC. 3. To establish an offence under Section 420 IPC, there must be an element of deception, fraud, or dishonest inducement, and a demonstrable victim who suffered a loss. Judgment Summary Background: This is a petition seeking regular bail for the applicant, Chitra Ramkrishna, in connection with an ECIR registered for offences punishable under Sections 3/4 of the PMLA, stemming from an FIR alleging illegal interception of phone calls of National Stock Exchange (NSE) employees. The allegations involve a contract between NSE and ISEC Services Private Limited for “Periodic Study of Cyber Vu

17. Court On Its Own Motion vs Naresh Sharma on 31 October, 2023

    High Court of Delhi31 Oct 2023

    Case Name: Court On Its Own Motion vs Naresh Sharma on 31 October, 2023 Court: High Court of Delhi Date of Judgment: 31.10.2023 Bench: Justice Suresh Kumar Kait & Justice Shalinder Kaur Subject: Contempt of Court Key Legal Propositions 1. Scandalizing the Court through derogatory allegations, even by a legally trained individual, constitutes contempt. 2. A contemnor’s lack of remorse and insistence on the validity of disrespectful allegations are aggravating factors in determining guilt. 3. The Court has the power to sentence a contemnor to imprisonment and impose a fine under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. Judgment Summary Background: The three contempt petitions arose from Naresh Sharma’s (the Contemnor) LPAs challenging a Single Bench’s judgment in W.P.(Crl.) petitions. The LPAs contained highly objectionable and scandalous allegations against the Single Judge, government officials, and the Supreme Court. A Division Bench issued show cause notices, leading to the present proceedings to determine if the Contemnor was guilty of criminal contempt. Held: A. On Contempt of Court & Scandalizing the Judiciary: Majority View: The Court held the Contemnor guilty of contempt

18. Ashish Gupta vs State Govt NCT of Delhi on 11 July, 2023

    High Court of Delhi11 Jul 2023

    Case Name: Ashish Gupta vs State Govt NCT of Delhi on 11 July, 2023 Court: High Court of Delhi Date of Judgment: 11 July, 2023 Bench: Justice Tushar Rao Gedela Subject: Bail Application – Economic Offences – Section 439 CrPC – Parity – Custodial Investigation Key Legal Propositions 1. While a non-bailable offence, the court may grant bail considering the period of incarceration already undergone by the applicant, the nature of the charges, and the likely duration of the trial. 2. An accused’s inability to furnish substantial security should not automatically disqualify them from being granted bail, and alternative security arrangements may be considered. 3. Prior declaration as a Proclaimed Offender does not automatically preclude the grant of bail, especially if the accused has surrendered and cooperated with the investigation. Judgment Summary Background: The present bail application was filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, by the applicant, accused in FIR No. 173/2015 registered under Sections 409/420/120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The charges were later reframed to Sections 406/174A IPC. The applicant had been in custody since 24.05.20

19. Naresh Sharma vs Union of India on 31 October, 2023

    High Court of Delhi31 Oct 2023

    Case Name: Naresh Sharma vs Union of India on 31 October, 2023 Court: High Court of Delhi Date of Judgment: 31 October, 2023 Bench: Justice Suresh Kumar Kait & Justice Shalinder Kaur Subject: Contempt of Court; Abuse of Process; Defamation; Judicial Conduct Key Legal Propositions 1. Scandalous and demeaning allegations against a Judge, particularly those fueled by disdain and hostile intent, cannot be disregarded by the Court. 2. A clear distinction must be drawn between legitimate critique and allegations intended to scandalize the Court. 3. The Court has the power to initiate contempt proceedings against individuals who attempt to vilify the judiciary through baseless accusations and defamatory statements. Judgment Summary Background: The appellant, Naresh Sharma, filed three Letters Patent Appeals (LPAs) challenging a judgment of a learned Single Bench of the Delhi High Court in W.P.(Crl.) 1797/2023, W.P.(Crl.) 1798/2023 & W.P.(Crl.) 1809/2023. The LPAs contained highly objectionable and scandalous allegations against the Single Judge, Government officials, and the Supreme Court, including demands for criminal prosecution and even the death penalty for the Judge. The Di

20. Trikkur Venkatachalam Radhakrishnan vs State of NCT of Delhi on 29th November, 2023

    High Court of Delhi

    Case Name: Trikkur Venkatachalam Radhakrishnan vs State of NCT of Delhi on 29th November, 2023 Court: High Court of Delhi Date of Judgment: 29th November, 2023 Bench: Justice Amit Bansal Subject: Bail Application – Offences under Sections 408/409/420/467/468/471/120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 Key Legal Propositions 1. Bail is the general rule, and jail is an exception, with the primary object of bail being to secure the accused’s presence at trial, not to punish them pre-conviction. 2. Prolonged detention in custody pending trial, particularly for an elderly accused with no likelihood of tampering with evidence, is contrary to the principles of personal liberty enshrined in the Constitution. 3. The stage of proceedings is crucial; if charges under Sections 408/409 IPC cannot be conclusively established at the stage of bail application, it weighs in favour of granting bail. Judgment Summary Background: The present application concerns a bail plea in connection with an FIR registered for offences relating to fraudulent transfer of property, alleging that the petitioner facilitated the illegal transfer of shares by providing digital signatures. The petitioner had been in cu