- Supreme Court ruled that breach of contractual terms don’t Ipso Facto constitute the offence without there being a clear case of entrustment.
- The bench of Justices Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud and A S Bopanna was dealing with the case of M N G Bharateesh Reddy vs Ramesh Ranganathan - the appeal challenging the judgment passed by the Karnataka HC.
- In this case, the complainant was employed as a Consultant Neurosurgeon by BGS Apollo Hospital, Mysore. His services were terminated for inconsistent and unsatisfactory behaviour in terms of the Consultancy Agreement.
- He filed a complaint before the Magistrate Court alleging that the Hospital management terminated his services with an oblique and ulterior motive of defaming him.
- The Additional Sessions Judge set aside the order of the JMFC on the ground that the complaint did not disclose the ingredients of the offences of defamation or cheating.
- The order of the Additional Sessions Judge was called into question by the first Respondent before the Karnataka HC. The Single Judge by the impugned judgment held that no case was made out against the Appellant under sections 499 and 500 of the IPC.
- Thus the issue before the Apex Court was whether the ingredients of the offences of cheating and criminal breach of trust have been made out on the face of the complaint.
- The court observed that the grievance of the complainant arises from the termination of his services at the hospital.
- The bench observed that the ingredients of Sections 415 and 420 are not made out in the present case. The allegations in the complaint are conspicuous by the absence of any reference to the practice of any deception or dishonest intention on behalf of the Appellant.
"Loved reading this piece by Krisha Mehta?
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"
