Om Pratap Singh v. Station House Officer
In the High Court of Karnataka
Crl.P.  8879/2022
Before Justice Rajendra Badamikar
Decided on October 13, 2022

Relevancy of the case: Bail application in a case involving cheating and impersonation allegations due to non-delivery of goods after 100% advance payment

Statutes and Provisions Involved

• The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Section 438)
• The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Section 419, 420)
• The Information Technology Act, 2008 (Section 66C, 66D)

Relevant Facts of the Case

• The complainant had prepaid ₹52.39 lakhs to the petitioner for obtaining liquid paraffin. However, the petitioner only supplied goods worth ₹26.31 lakhs.
• The petitioner had not supplied the goods worth the remaining ₹26.07 lakhs. He did not respond when the complainant tried to contact him several times.
• A Google search on the petitioner’s name proved he is a habitual offender and has cheated several people in the past.
• Based on the complainant’s report, the police registered a case against the petitioner.

Prominent Arguments by the Advocates

• The petitioner’s counsel contended that the petitioner had no intention of cheating. The goods came from a foreign country, and due to the war between Ukraine and Russia, there was a delay in the shipment of goods.
• The petitioner’s counsel further submitted that the petitioner has remitted ₹ 8,00,000 to the complainant’s account. He would pay the balance amount in due time.
• The respondent’s counsel submitted that a Google search in the petitioner’s name disclosed he is a habitual offender and had cheated people in the past.

Opinion of the Bench

• There is impersonation in the present case. Hence, Section 419 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, is not applicable.

Final Decision

• The bench allowed the bail application.

Aparna Ajay, an undergraduate student at Symbiosis Law School, Hyderabad, prepared this case summary during her internship with The Cyber Blog India in January/February 2023.