Indian Penal Code, 1860
Sections 406, 420 & 120B—Criminal breach of trust, cheating and criminal conspiracy—Petition to quash FIR—Two share purchase agreements executed between second respondent and petitioners—As per the FIR, it has been stated that complainant/second respondent paid the amounts as per required under the SPA and petitioners despite receiving the amount did not transfer the ownership of accused companies to second respondent—Petitioners, on the other hand, have taken steps towards performance of their obligation under the SPA by transferring the physical possession of the project of the accused companies which shows that even they were ready and willing to meet their commitments—Admitted fact that arbitration proceedings are pending between parties—Arbitral Tribunal has rightfully observed that there is only acrimony and lack of trust between the parties—Such acrimony and lack of trust has prompted the filing of the current FIR—Matter under consideration is a civil dispute, and only distinction lies in the interpretation of the terms of the SPA and the timeline of their commitments and obligations—There is no siphoning off funds by petitioners as alleged—Allegations of breach of trust are also not made out as there is no dishonest misappropriation of property by the petitioners—Allegations can only be of “lack of trust” but not “breach of trust”—FIR read as a whole does not disclose the ingredients of Sections 406/420/120B of IPC and is hereby quashed—Petition allowed. [Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 482]
[Paras 39 to 44]