Patna High Court
HEMANT KUMAR DASversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The petitioner, being merely an introducer and the dispute being civil, is not liable under Sections 406 and 420 IPC, and the order taking cognizance is quashed.
Summary
Hemant Kumar Das filed a petition to quash the order dated 11‑04‑2013 that took cognizance against him under Sections 406 and 420 IPC in a case arising from a contract dispute between the informant, Shivram Krishna Gupta, and Rabindra Bhavan Parishad. The FIR alleged that Das, as the introducer, induced the contract, leading to non‑payment for a generator installed by the informant. The petitioner argued that he was only an introducer and not a party to the contract, making the dispute civil rather than criminal. The informant contended that Das’s role in introducing the parties made him liable. The High Court held that Das’s role was limited to introduction, the matter was civil in nature, and therefore the criminal proceedings were improper, quashing the order and allowing the petition.
Issues considered
- Whether an introducer to a contract can be held liable under Sections 406 and 420 IPC.
- Whether the dispute arising from non‑payment under a contract is civil in nature and not cognizable as a criminal offence.
- Whether the order taking cognizance against the petitioner should be quashed.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 406, 420
Subjects
- criminal breach of trust
- cheating
- quash of criminal proceedings
- introducer liability
- civil contract dispute
- jurisdiction
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.64936 of 2022
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-257 Year-2012 Thana- KOTWALI District- Patna
======================================================
HEMANT KUMAR DAS Son of Late Awadhesh Kumar Das Resident of Flat
504A, White House Apartment, Buddh Marg, P.S.- Kotwali, Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar Bihar
2. SHIVRAM KRISHNA GUPTA SON OF LATE S. R. GUPTA RESIDENT
OF VILLAGE- OWNER OF M/S S.K. KRISHNA AND CO. SATKAR
HOTEL, DAK BUNGLOW CHAURAHA, PS- KAOTWALI, PATNA
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sanjay Singh, Sr. Adv.
Mr.Nikhil Kumar Agrawal, Adv.
Mrs.Aditi Hansaria, Adv.
Mr.Keshav Bhardwaj, Adv.
For the State : Mr. J.N. Thakur, APP
For the Informant : Mr.Sanjay Kumar, Adv.
Mr.Kushagra Kaustubh Ojha, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR
PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
4 16-02-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as
the learned APP for the State and the learned counsel for the
informant.
2. The present application is being filed for quashing
the order dated 11.04.2013 passed by Sri Harsh Wardan, the
Learned Judicial Magistrate, Second Class, Patna, in Kotwali
P.S. Case No. 257 of 2012 dated 28.05.2012, whereby
cognizance has been taken under Sections 406 and 420 of the
Indian Penal Code against the petitioner, as well as for setting
aside the entire criminal proceedings against the petitioner.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.64936 of 2022(4) dt.16-02-2026
2/3
3. According to FIR, there was contract between the
informant and Rabindra Bhavan. The informant installed
generator, but Rabindra Bhavan did not make payment. It is
alleged that it was the petitioner, on whose instigation, the
contract was entered into between the parties.
4. Mr. Sanjay Singh, the learned senior counsel for the
petitioner has submitted that from bare perusal of the FIR, it
transpires that the status of the petitioner is merely that of an
introducer. He is not party to the contract. The contract is
between the informant/firm and the Rabindra Bhavan Parishad.
It has further been submitted that moreover, it is a case of civil
nature. The cognizance against other accused persons has been
quashed.
5. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the
informant has submitted that it was the petitioner, who
introduced the informant to enter into contract with the
Rabindra Bhavan Parishad.
6. The status of the petitioner appears only that of an
introducer between the parties. Moreover, if there is violation of
terms and conditions of the contract, the ultimate remedy lies
before the civil court of competent jurisdiction and not before
the criminal court.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.64936 of 2022(4) dt.16-02-2026
3/3
7. Considering the above-mentioned facts and
circumstances, the order dated 11.04.2013 passed by the learned
Judicial Magistrate, 2nd Class, Patna whereby cognizance has
been taken against the petitioner in connection with Kotwali P.S.
Case No. 257 of 2012 is hereby quashed.
8. Accordingly, this criminal miscellaneous petition
stands allowed.
(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J)
kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…