9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Jurisdiction of the Magistrate to order reinvestigation without affording an opportunity to the appellant. 2. Whether the allegations of the complainant constitute an offence of cheating under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code. Analysis: 1. The case involved a godman facing prosecution for cheating under Section 420 IPC. The High Court dismissed the appellant's petition to quash the criminal proceedings, leading to the present appeal. The FIR was lodged by a complainant alleging that the godman claimed to possess divine healing powers and demanded money for curing his daughter's speech impairment. The police initially referred to the case as a mistake of fact due to religious beliefs prevalent among devotees. However, after reinvestigation, the police concluded that the godman had committed an offence under Section 420 IPC. The appellant contended that the Magistrate lacked jurisdiction to order reinvestigation without giving him an opportunity. The Supreme Court held that the power of the police to conduct further investigation is recognized under Section 173(8) of the CrPC, even after the court takes cognizance of an offence. The court stated that the police can seek formal permission for further investigation, and there is no obligation for the court to hear the accused before directing such investigation. The court dismissed the appeal, upholding the Magistrate's order for further investigation. 2. The appellant argued that the allegations did not constitute an offence of cheating under Section 420 IPC since the complainant reposed faith in the godman's divine powers. The Court clarified that if someone represents having divine powers and induces another person to believe in them, leading to financial transactions without the desired results, it amounts to cheating under Section 420 IPC. The Court emphasized that inducement through fraudulent representation can create a presumption of cheating, and it is the accused's burden to rebut this presumption. In this case, the Court found that the complainant responding to the representation of divine powers and making payments without the promised outcome fell within the ambit of cheating. Therefore, the Court rejected the contention that the allegations did not disclose an offence under Section 420 IPC and upheld the Magistrate's decision to take cognizance of the offence. In conclusion, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the Magistrate's order for further investigation and holding that the allegations constituted an offence of cheating under Section 420 IPC based on the godman's fraudulent representations and financial inducements.
|
