The Supreme Court of India recently upheld the Bombay High Court’s ruling, which quashed a criminal case against an advocate accused of professional misconduct. The case involved allegations of fraudulent promises regarding litigation outcomes and financial misappropriation, leading to severe distress for the complainant.

Case Background

A client had filed an FIR against an advocate, accusing him of guaranteeing a favorable verdict in a civil dispute and accepting a significant sum of money as fees. Further, the client alleged that the advocate had purchased his land but failed to pay the remaining balance of Rs. 86.45 lakhs. Due to financial distress and emotional turmoil, the client reportedly attempted suicide.

A criminal case was registered against the advocate under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for cheating. Additionally, the charge sheet included offenses under Sections 420, 323, 506, and 109 of the IPC. However, the accused advocate approached the Bombay High Court, seeking to quash the case under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Read Also:- Andhra Pradesh HC Dismisses PIL Against Increased Ticket Prices of Telugu Film 'Sankranthiki Vasthunam'

The Bombay High Court ruled that no criminal offense was made out based on the FIR allegations. The court held that:

“Wrong advice or an alleged promise of a favorable outcome in litigation, being a promise given for an illegal purpose and against public policy, is no promise which is enforceable in law. Therefore, it would not constitute an inducement for the delivery of property and hence would not amount to cheating within the meaning of Section 415 of IPC.”

Consequently, the High Court quashed the criminal proceedings against the advocate.

Read Also:- Supreme Court Defers Ranveer Allahabadia's Passport Plea; Investigation Nears Completion

Aggrieved by the Bombay High Court’s decision, the complainant approached the Supreme Court. The bench, comprising Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and K. Vinod Chandran, declined to interfere with the High Court's judgment, stating:

“We see absolutely no reason to interfere with the order of the High Court, in exercise of our jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution of India.”

The Supreme Court upheld the legal principle that a mere breach of promise does not amount to cheating under Section 420 of the IPC unless there was a dishonest intent from the outset.

Case Title: CHANDRASEKHAR RAMESH GALANDE VERSUS SATISH GAJANAN MULIK & ANR.