LegalFirms.in
LegalFirms.in Judgments · legalfirms.in/judgments/jupally-lakshmikantha-reddy-vs-state-of-andhra-pradesh-anr-20250910/ · Printed 07 Nov 2026
Criminal · Reportable judgment

Jupally Lakshmikantha Reddy vs State of Andhra Pradesh & Anr.

Court
Supreme Court of India
Date
10 September 2025
Case No.
Criminal Appeal No. 3951 of 2025
Result
Allowed
Bench
B.V. Nagarathna, Joymalya Bagchi
Citation
[2025] 10 S.C.R. 58 : 2025 INSC 1096
Acts & Sections
IPC National Building Code of India, 2016
Supreme Court Reports [2025] 10 S.C.R. 58 : 2025 INSC 1096
Issue for consideration
Whether the High Court erred in refusing to quash the proceedings u/s.420, IPC against the appellant.
Headnote

Penal Code, 1860 – ss.420, 465, 468, 471 – National Building Code of India, 2016 – Appellant’s society was running an educational institution from a building having height of 14.20 metres – FIR was filed u/ss.420, 465, 468, 471; chargesheet filed u/s.420 alleged that the appellant had created a forged Fire NOC and used it to obtain recognition/renewal of affiliation for his institution – High Court refused to quash the proceedings – Challenge to:

Held: 1.1 In order to attract the offence of cheating, a person must knowingly make a false statement which would induce another to part with property or to do or omit to do a thing which the latter would not do or omit unless deceived and thereby is likely to suffer damage/harm in body, mind, reputation or property. [Para 13]

1.2 Further, admittedly, NOC from the Fire Department was not necessary for recognition/renewal of affiliation of educational institutions which are imparting education from the buildings having height below 15 metres – Thus, NOC from the Fire Department was not necessary for grant of such recognition/renewal of affiliation as admittedly, the height of the appellant’s building was below

15 metres – Therefore, the representation of the appellant that he possessed a valid NOC cannot be said to have induced the Education Department to grant recognition or renew the affiliation. [Paras 10, 16]

1.3 To attract penal consequences, it must be shown that the false representation was of a material fact which had induced the victim to either part with property or act in a manner which they would not otherwise do but for such false representation – In the absence of such vital link between the alleged false representation and the issuance of recognition/renewal of affiliation, the essential ingredient of offence is not satisfied. [Para 16]

1.4 Moreover, there is nothing on record to show the appellant had manufactured the alleged fake document which is a sine qua non to attract s.465 IPC – In fact, the original fabricated document was not even recovered. [Para 18]

1.5 Similarly, offences u/s.468 and s.471 are also not attracted, as the requisite mens rea, i.e., dishonest intention to cause wrongful loss to the Education Department and wrongful gain to himself was not demonstrated as the issuance of the recognition was not dependent on the production of the alleged forged NOC. [Para 20]

Read the full headnote (2 more paragraphs)

1.6 Essential ingredients of cheating or forgery not disclosed – Impugned order of the High Court set aside – Proceedings u/s.420 quashed. [Para 21]

Penal Code, 1860 – s.420 – Ingredients, enumerated. [Para 12] Words and Phrases – ‘dishonestly’; ‘fraudulently’; ‘wrongful loss’; ‘wrongful gain’ – Definition – Penal Code, 1860. [Para 13]

Keywords: Sections 420, 465, 468, 471 IPC · Cheating · Forgery · No Objection Certificate (NOC) · Fire NOC · NOC from Fire Department · Alleged forged Fire NOC · Alleged fake document · Original fabricated document not recovered · Fire Department · District Fire Officer · Educational buildings · Educational institution · Recognition/renewal of affiliation of educational institutions · Alleged false representation · False representation of material fact · mens rea · Dishonest intention · Dishonest inducement · Wrongful loss

As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Headnotes prepared by: Divya Pandey Forgery for purpose of cheating. Using as genuine a forged document or electronic record.. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.

Full Judgment Text

Judgment Joymalya Bagchi, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. The appeal is directed against judgment and order dated 18.04.2024 in Criminal Petition No. 2197/2021 passed by High Court of Andhra Pradesh whereby the High Court refused to quash proceedings in CC No. 303 of 2020 under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 18601. 3. Appellant’s society namely, JVRR Education Society is running a college since 2016 from a non-multi-storeyed building comprising ground – 03 upstairs, with a height of 14.20 metres. On 13.07.2018, one V. Sreenivasa Reddy, District Fire Officer, Kurnool, submitted a Hereinafte
Full text available to subscribers
Subscribe to access complete judgment text, daily digests, and AI-powered legal research tools. For informational and research purposes only.
View Subscription Plans →
Annual plans from ₹1,599 + GST.

This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.

All SC judgments →