Whether failure to follow rules and regulation amounts to offence of cheating or criminal breach of trust?

He will now proceed to consider the final report submitted by the Police (C.I.D.). I should, however, like to observe for the benefit of the learned Magistrate that he will bear in mind that mere failure to follow rules and regulations is neither cheating nor breach of trust. He will also bear in mind while applying himself to the case diary with all thoroughness whether there is any material to show that the Railways have suffered. In order to constitute offence of cheating causation of damage or harm to a person in body, mind, reputation or property is essential. The learned Magistrate will direct his attention to this aspect of the matter. Loss to the Railways cannot be presumed merely from the fact of irregular booking. The learned Magistrate will consider the effect of issuing of despatch advice and forwarding notes by Tisco at the time of despatch of goods. The learned Magistrate will also bear in mind that mere failure to pay does not amount to cheating for, mere breach of contract is not cheating. The attention of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate is particularly drawn to the cases of Harkrishna Mahatab v. Emperor MANU/BH/0295/1929 : AIR1930Pat209 , Major Robert Stuart Wauchope v. Emperor MANU/WB/0123/1933 : AIR1933Cal800 and the State of Kerala v. A. Prasad Pillai and Anr. MANU/SC/0263/1972 : 1972CriLJ1243 . To my mind that Railway as an organisation profited rather than lost by the unusual procedure adopted in relation to Tisco. The learned. Magistrate will also consider whether the whole case diary reveals any material indicating that any public servant had enriched himself either by bribery or by breach or by breach of faith. After going through the case diary thoroughly the learned Magistrate will decide dehors the recommendation of Superintendent of Railway Police, respondent No. 7 and C.I.D. whether any offence had been committed and if so which accused should be put on trial.

Equivalent Citation: AIR1980SC326, 1980CriLJ98, (1980)1SCC554, (1980)SCC(Cri)272, [1980]2SCR16

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Criminal Appeal Nos. 301 and 300 of 1979

Decided On: 13.11.1979

State of Bihar and Anr. Vs. J.A.C. Saldanha and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

D.A. Desai, O. Chinnappa Reddy and R.S. Sarkaria, JJ.

Print Page

Whether right of a person to construct residential houses can be taken away?

The law in this behalf is explicit. Right of a person to construct residential houses in the residential area is a valuable right. The said right can only be regulated in terms of a regulatory statute but unless there exists a clear provision the same cannot be taken away. It is also a trite law that the building plans are required to be dealt with in terms of the existing law. Determination of such a question cannot be postponed far less taken away. Doctrine of Legitimate Expectation in a case of this nature would have a role to play.

Rights of parties cannot be intermeddled so long as an appropriate amendment in legislation is not brought into force - Right of a person to construct residential houses in residential area is a valuable right and unless there exists a clear provision the same can not be taken away 

A statutory authority must exercise its jurisdiction within a reasonable time

Supreme Court of India

T. Vijayalakshmi & Ors vs Town Planning Member & Anr on 19 October, 2006

Bench: S.B. Sinha, Dalveer Bhandari

          
Citation;(2006)8 SCC502,AIR2007SC25,

Print Page