In Brief
In this case, the appellant's parents entered into an agreement to sell a property with the complainant. When the transaction fell through, the complainant filed a police complaint alleging cheating, breach of trust, and criminal intimidation against the appellant and his parents. The appellant was neither party to nor owner of the property. The Supreme Court held that since the appellant had no involvement in the disputed transaction and was merely present during negotiations, the criminal proceedings against him were based on false and frivolous allegations instituted with malicious intent. The Court quashed the proceedings against the appellant, finding that subjecting an innocent person to criminal trial for alleged offences in which he played no part would be oppressive and unjust.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.