In its adjudication, the Supreme Court has determined that the defendant’s inability to consummate the marriage within the specified premises does not satisfy the essential legal criteria required for establishing the offense of cheating pursuant to Section 417 of the Indian Penal Code.
“We do not see how an offence even under Section 417 of IPC is made out against the present appellant. There can be multiple reasons for initiating a marriage proposal and then the proposal not reaching the desired end. There is no such evidence before the prosecution and therefore no offence under Section 417 is also made out.”, the Supreme Court said.
In a judicial overturning of the High Court’s previous decision to reject the annulment plea based on Section 417 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), the Bench consisting of Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and P.B. Varale clarified that proving the offense of cheating under Section 417 IPC necessitates the prosecution to provide substantial evidence showcasing the accused’s deliberate intent to deceive right from the outset.
“Time and again, this Court has reiterated that in order to make out an offence under cheating the intention to cheat or deceive should be right from the beginning. By no stretch of imagination, this is even reflected from the complaint made by the informant.”
The principal contention pertained to a premeditated matrimonial arrangement involving the aggrieved party and the individual accused of transgression. The complainant’s father disbursed Rs. 75,000 as an earnest sum to secure the wedding venue. However, the anticipated nuptials failed to materialize following the complainant’s discovery, via a newspaper publication, of the accused’s purported marriage to another individual.
Consequently, the complainant initiated legal recourse by lodging a police complaint against the accused and their family under pertinent statutory provisions. Subsequently, the accused sought judicial intervention to quash the charges against them. While the court dismissed certain allegations, it upheld others.
Dissatisfied with the lower court’s ruling, the accused pursued appellate relief before the higher judiciary, namely, the Supreme Court. Upon meticulous examination of the evidentiary record, the Supreme Court rendered a determination, holding that the evidentiary threshold requisite for establishing premeditated intent to defraud on the part of the accused from the outset was not met.
“There can be multiple reasons for initiating a marriage proposal and then the proposal not reaching the desired end.”, the Court said.
“in order to prove an offence of cheating in such cases prosecution must have reliable and trustworthy evidence”, the Court added.
Upon determining that the prosecution failed to furnish sufficient evidence substantiating the alleged offense under Section 417, the court concluded that the requisite elements for establishing said offense were not satisfied. Consequently, the court opted to dismiss the legal proceedings under Section 417 IPC.
