Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Suganchand Kasturchand Raka, was the accused in Criminal Case No.456/2001 filed by respondent no.2, Vasant Bhavanji Shah, alleging criminal breach of trust under Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The complainant claimed interest in a registered public trust, 'Shri Jain Shvetambar Murtipujak Mandir' at Jalgaon, and alleged that the accused, as ex-trustee and president, had not called for quotations or tenders and allotted work to M/s Mahajan and Associates, paying them by cheques, which allegedly constituted criminal breach of trust. The trial court, after considering evidence led in March 2003, found that the transaction was bonafide on behalf of the trust and dismissed the complaint on 31.3.2003. The complainant filed Criminal Revision Application No.150/2003, which was allowed by the learned 2nd Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, Jalgaon, setting aside the dismissal. The accused then filed the present criminal writ petition. During the pendency of the petition, the parties filed a joint application dated 1.8.2011 stating that the complainant did not want to proceed further. The trial court refused to dismiss the complaint on the ground that Section 406 IPC is non-compoundable. The High Court, exercising its inherent powers, held that when the transaction was bonafide and the parties have compromised, continuing proceedings would be an abuse of process. The court quashed the complaint and set aside the revisional order, thereby allowing the petition.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Criminal Breach of Trust - Section 406 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Compromise - The complainant and accused compromised, but the trial court refused to dismiss the complaint on the ground that Section 406 IPC is non-compoundable. The High Court held that when the transaction is bonafide on behalf of a trust and the parties have settled, continuing proceedings would be an abuse of process. The court quashed the complaint and set aside the revisional order. (Paras 2-5) B) Trust Law - Bonafide Transaction - Trust Property - The accused, as trustee, paid architects by cheques for trust work. The trial court found it was a bonafide transaction and dismissed the complaint. The revisional court set aside the dismissal. The High Court restored the trial court's order, holding that no criminal breach of trust was made out. (Paras 3-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether a complaint under Section 406 IPC can be quashed when the parties have compromised and the transaction was bonafide on behalf of a trust.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the petition, quashed the complaint in Criminal Case No.456/2001, and set aside the order of the revisional court.
Law Points
- Criminal breach of trust
- Non-compoundable offence
- Compromise
- Bonafide transaction
- Trust property
- Section 406 IPC
- Inherent powers
- Quashing of complaint
