Indian Penal Code, 1860 · Chapter XVII: Of Offences against Property · Of Cheating
Section 415: Cheating
The Indian Penal Code, 1860 was repealed and replaced by the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 from 1 July 2024. It still applies to offences and proceedings from before that date.
Whoever, by deceiving any person, fraudulently or dishonestly induces the person so deceived to deliver any property to any person, or to consent that any person shall retain any property, or intentionally induces the person so deceived to do or omit to do anything which he would not do or omit if he were not so deceived, and which act or omission causes or is likely to cause damage or harm to that person in body, mind, reputation or property, is said to “cheat”.
Explanation.—A dishonest concealment of facts is a deception within the meaning of this section.
Corresponding sections were matched by comparing the wording of both official texts, and for the IPC and BNS, also against a published correspondence table. Wording, punishments and structure often changed, so read both sections before relying on the match.
Source: India Code (Legislative Department), the text of the Act as it stood before its repeal. Words in square brackets [ ] were inserted or substituted by later amending Acts, and *** marks words omitted by an amendment. The amendment footnotes are not reproduced here.
Supreme Court judgments citing the section 415
-
Jupally Lakshmikantha Reddy v. State of Andhra Pradesh & Anr.
Whether the High Court erred in refusing to quash the proceedings u/s.420, IPC against the appellant.
-
S.N. Vijaylakshmi & Ors. v. State of Karnataka & Anr.
Whether any criminal offence in the background of the factual position is made out to justify criminal proceedings against the appellants and whether the same should proceed; whether on the same cause of action, based…
-
Rikhab Birani & Anr. v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.
Whether the High Court erred in dismissing the s.482, CrPC application filed by the appellants despite the matter being civil in nature.
-
Biswajyoti Chatterjee v. State of West Bengal & Anr.
Whether the allegations against the appellant, as they stand, constitute an offence, u/ss.376(2)(f), 417 and 506 IPC; and whether the case of the appellant is fit for discharge u/s.227 CrPC, 1973.
-
Marippan & Anr. v. State Represented
Whether the High Court was justified in rejecting the petition seeking quashing of the chargesheet in the criminal case qua the appellants-parents.
-
Jit Vinayak Arolkar v. State of Goa & Ors.
By the impugned judgment, the High Court has dismissed a writ petition filed by the appellant for quashing a First Information Report registered at the instance of the 4 th respondent for the offence punishable under…
-
Delhi Race Club (1940) Ltd. & Ors. v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.
High Court, if justified in declining to quash and set aside the summoning order passed by the Magistrate, against the appellants-company and its office bearers, for offence punishable u/ss. 406 and 420 IPC.
-
Sri Dattatraya v. Sharanappa
Whether the High Court had rightly affirmed the acquittal of the respondent in a complaint case moved for the offence punishable u/s. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 by its judgment dated 03.03.2023.
-
Sharif Ahmed and Another v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Another
Nature of chargesheets filed in some jurisdictions by the State/ Police, without stating sufficient details of the facts constituting the offense or putting the relevant evidence on record; significance of chargesheets…
-
Vipin Sahni and Another v. Central Bureau of Investigation
Whether it is open for High Court to convert or treat a petition filed under section 482 Cr.P.C., as one filed under section 397 Cr.P.C.
-
A.M. Mohan v. The State Represented by SHO and Another
FIR registered against accused Nos.1, 2 and 3 (appellant) for offences punishable u/s.420 r/w s.34, Penal Code, 1860. High Court whether justified in rejecting the petition filed by the appellant u/s.482, Code of…
-
Mariam Fasihuddin & Anr. v. State by Adugodi Police Station & Anr.
The crux of respondent No. 2’s allegations is that the appellants purportedly forged his signature on the passport application submitted to obtain the minor child’s passport. Whether the actions of the appellants prima…
- Shri Sukhbir Singh Badal v. Balwant Singh Khera
- M N G Bharateesh Reddy v. Ramesh Ranganathan and Another
- Vijay Kumar Ghai & Ors. v. The State of West Bengal & Ors.
- Mitesh Kumar J. Sha v. The State of Karnataka & Ors.
- Priti Saraf & Anr. v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.
- Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. National Bulk Handling Corporation Pvt. Ltd.
- The State of Uttar Pradesh v. Aman Mittal & Anr.
- Mehboob-Ur-Rehman (D) Thr. Lrs. v. Sudha Seetharam & Anr
- Satishchandra Ratanlal Shah v. State of Gujarat and Another
- Samir Sa.Hay @ Sameer Sahay v. State of U.P. and Another
- International Advanced Research Centre for Powder Metallurgy and New Materials (Arci) &Ors. v. Nimra Cerglass Technics (P) Ltd.&Anr.
- Mr. Robert John D'Souza and Others v. Mr. Stephen v. Gomesandanother