Real judgements, distilled

Legal Case Shots

Court judgements broken down into the case type, how the decision played out, and the lesson worth remembering, with the full judgement available as a PDF.

Frequently asked questions

Is this suitable for use in legal research and court filings?+

Legal Case Shots is built to help you quickly identify and understand relevant precedent. For citation in pleadings or filings, always verify against the full judgment PDF and current citation format (e.g., 2026 INSC ___).

How is a "lesson learnt" different from the judgment's holding?+

The holding is what the court legally decided. The lesson learnt translates that into a practical takeaway: what a lawyer should factor into case strategy or client advice as a result of this precedent.

Is the full judgment available, or just a summary?+

Both. Each case shows a distilled summary (case type, key holding, and lesson learnt) and links to the full judgment as a PDF for when you need the complete text for research or citation.

Can I filter judgments by date or case type?+

Yes. Use Advanced Filters to narrow results by decision date and by practice area, including Constitutional Law, Criminal Law, Service & Administrative Law, Family Law, Civil Property & Inheritance, and Labour & Industrial Law.

Can I search judgments by a specific judge?+

Yes. You can filter judgments by the judge or bench that decided the case, which is useful for tracking how a particular judge has reasoned on similar issues across multiple rulings.

What is Legal Case Shots?+

Legal Case Shots is a searchable database of Supreme Court of India judgments, each broken down into the case type, the court's key holding, and a practical lesson learnt, with the full judgment available as a PDF for citation or deeper reading.

Criminal LawSupreme Court of India

Radheyshyam vs. State of Rajasthan

Not available · 2024 INSC 1064Decided 22 Jul 2024
Not available
Justice Vikram Nath · Justice Prasanna Bhalachandra Varale

Background

The appellants had agreed in 2020 to sell a commercial property ("Swami Towers") to respondent no. 2 for about Rs. 5.11 crore, with an advance of Rs. 11 lakh at signing and the rest payable in instalments over 18 months. After respondent no. 2 paid a total of about Rs. 1 crore but the appellants refused to execute the final sale registry, he filed an FIR in 2022 accusing them of cheating and criminal breach of trust, and separately also filed a civil suit for specific performance of the same agreement, which remained pending. The Rajasthan High Court declined to quash the FIR, prompting the appellants' appeal to the Supreme Court.

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court held that a mere failure or refusal to complete a sale under an Agreement to Sell, without evidence of fraudulent intent from the outset, does not by itself satisfy the legal ingredients of cheating (Section 420/415 IPC) or criminal breach of trust (Section 406/405 IPC), since there was no dishonest inducement to pay and no "entrustment" of property in the legal sense. The Court found the complaint was essentially an attempt to convert a purely civil contractual dispute (for which the complainant had already sought the correct remedy: a specific performance suit) into a criminal case to pressure the sellers. It therefore allowed the appeal, quashed the FIR, and clarified that its observations would not affect how the pending civil suit is decided on its own merits.

Lesson Learnt

A breach of a property sale agreement or a seller's refusal to register a sale deed is ordinarily a civil wrong to be resolved through a suit for specific performance, not grounds for a criminal complaint of cheating: criminal law cannot be used as a shortcut or pressure tactic to enforce a contract.

Radheyshyam vs. State of Rajasthan – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware