Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Sanjay Dhondu Manchekar, was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Mumbai, under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code for allegedly cheating the complainant by promising to marry her and inducing her to part with cash and valuables worth approximately Rs.4,61,650 between 2004 and 2008. The complainant's husband died on the day of their marriage in December 1998, and she later met the appellant through a relative. They developed an affair, and the appellant promised to marry her. When he resiled from the promise, the complainant approached social workers and eventually filed a complaint. The trial court convicted the appellant under Section 420 IPC but acquitted him under Sections 376 and 506 IPC. The appellant appealed to the Bombay High Court. The High Court examined the evidence and found that the prosecution failed to prove that the appellant had a dishonest intention at the time of making the promise. The court noted that the relationship was consensual and that the appellant's subsequent refusal to marry did not amount to cheating. The testimony of the complainant and her sister was found to be inconsistent and lacking corroboration. The court held that the essential ingredients of cheating under Section 420 IPC were not established beyond reasonable doubt. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, the conviction and sentence were set aside, and the appellant was acquitted.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Cheating - Section 420 IPC - Promise to marry - The prosecution must prove that the accused had a dishonest intention at the time of making the promise to induce the complainant to part with property. Mere breach of promise or subsequent refusal to marry does not constitute cheating. The court held that the evidence did not establish that the appellant had fraudulent intention from the inception of the relationship. (Paras 7-10) B) Evidence - Credibility of Witnesses - Interested Witnesses - The testimony of the complainant and her sister, being interested witnesses, requires corroboration. The court found that their evidence was inconsistent and lacked independent corroboration, making it unsafe to base a conviction. (Paras 5-6) C) Criminal Law - Acquittal - Benefit of Doubt - Where the prosecution fails to prove the essential ingredients of the offence beyond reasonable doubt, the accused is entitled to acquittal. The court allowed the appeal and set aside the conviction. (Para 11)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code for cheating by inducing the complainant to part with money on a false promise to marry is sustainable in law.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Conviction and sentence under Section 420 IPC set aside. Appellant acquitted. Fine, if paid, to be refunded.
Law Points
- Cheating
- Section 420 IPC
- Promise to marry
- Dishonest inducement
- Breach of promise
- Criminal breach of trust
- Acquittal
