Cheating with knowledge that wrongful loss may ensue to person whose interest offender is bound to protect
Section 418 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 deals with cheating with knowledge that wrongful loss may ensue to person whose interest offender is bound to protect. Whoever cheats with the knowledge that he is likely thereby to cause wrongful loss to a person whose interest in the transaction to which the cheating relates, he was bound either by law, or by legal contract, to protect, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may The Act came into force on 01 Jan 1862. Repealed by section 358 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (45 of 2023) with effect from 1 July 2024, but conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under it.
Whoever cheats with the knowledge that he is likely thereby to cause wrongful loss to a person whose interest in the transaction to which the cheating relates, he was bound either by law, or by legal contract, to protect, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.
Section 418, The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Act 45 of 1860).
Now in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
BNS 318 Cheating Close, with changes 76%
Measured by comparing the text of the two provisions, not taken from an official correspondence table — there is no machine-readable one. See both texts side by side before relying on it.
Both regimes are live. The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force. We never redirect one to the other.
Cross-references
Extracted from the operative text of the enactments themselves. Every destination below exists in our corpus.
Referred to by 7
- Arunachal Pradesh Excise Act s. 41
- Excise Law of Bihar & Jharkhand 1915 s. 53
- Hyderabad City Police Act, 1348 Fasli s. 88
- Odisha Excise Act s. 60 Penalty for fraud by licensed manufacturer or vender or his servant
- Sikkim Excise Act s. 36
- Telangana Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Boot-leggers, Dacoits, Drug-Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders Land-Grabbers, Spurious Seed Offenders, Insecticide Offenders, Fertiliser Offenders, Food Adulteration Offenders, Fake Document Offenders, Scheduled Commodities Offenders, Forest Offenders, Gaming Offenders, Sexual Offenders, Explosive Substances Offenders, Arms Offenders, Cyber Crime Offenders and White Collar or Financial Offenders Act s. 17
- Tripura Excise Act s. 52 Penalty for fraud by licensed manufacturer or vendor or his servant
Related judgements & precedents
These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.
-
Internl. Adv. Res. Cen. for P. M. & N. M. vs Nimra Cerglass (p) Ltd.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
For an offence of cheating to be constituted under Section 420 IPC, the essential ingredients are: (i) making of a false representation; (ii) knowledge by the accused that representation is false; (iii) making the representation in order to deceive; and (iv) mens rea of dishonest inducement. Critically, the dishonest intention must exist at the time of making the inducement, not from subsequent failure to perform. A mere breach of contract, even if causing substantial financial loss, cannot give rise to criminal prosecution for cheating unless fraudulent or dishonest intention is demonstrated at the beginning of the transaction. When a technology transfer agreement explicitly provides for experimental development with contingency provisions for performance guarantee tests and liquidated damages, parties have contemplated possibility of failure to achieve specifications, negating the inference of dishonest intention at inception.
On this section: Cheating with knowledge that wrongful loss may be caused - originally charged in complaint but investigating officer concluded no offence was made out
-
Maniprasad vs State of Kerala
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Not every breach of contract constitutes criminal cheating. For an offense under Section 420 IPC to be made out, the complainant must establish that the accused had fraudulent or dishonest intention at the time of making the promise or representation. If the intention to cheat develops after the transaction is entered into, or if there is mere non-performance of a promise without initial culpable dishonest intention, no criminal offense of cheating can be said to have been committed. The real test for quashing criminal proceedings is whether the allegations in the complaint disclose a criminal offense or merely constitute a civil dispute regarding breach of contract.
On this section: Criminal Breach of Trust - charged but not substantiated in complaint as alleged
-
Venkatramanan vs Sub Insp. of Police
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
For the offence of cheating under Section 420 IPC, the complainant must establish that the accused harbored fraudulent or dishonest intention at the very inception of making the promise or representation. Mere breach of contract, even with failure to perform promised services, does not constitute cheating in the absence of such fraudulent intention at the time of inception. Where allegations in a complaint disclose only breach of contract without any element of fraud or dishonesty at inception, and allowing police investigation would constitute abuse of process of court, the criminal proceedings should be quashed under Section 482 CrPC.
On this section: Cheating with knowledge that wrong will be caused - cited in FIR, analyzed as part of cheating offence framework
-
Rishipal vs State of U. P.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Continuation of criminal proceedings against the appellant for commission of alleged offences under Sections 34, 379, 411, 417, 418, 420, 467, 458 and 477 IPC constitutes pure abuse of process of law and warrants quashing of the complaint case, as the uncontroverted allegations do not prima facie establish any criminal offence - at most they disclose negligence or dereliction of official duty, not criminal conspiracy or cheating. The power under Section 482 CrPC to quash proceedings must be exercised when a trained judicial mind concludes that continuation would lead to abuse of process and miscarriage of justice, even though such exercise is an exception rather than the rule. Courts must actively prevent vexatious complaints filed by frustrated litigants seeking to misuse criminal law as a tool to settle civil disputes and to harass innocent third parties.
On this section: Cheating with knowledge that wrongful loss may be caused. Charged against appellant.
-
Jaldhar Thakur vs The State of Bihar
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When a dispute arising from a financial transaction involves disputed questions of fact regarding payment terms and amounts, and the underlying transaction is documented through a written agreement, such disputes are primarily matters for civil remedy rather than criminal prosecution. Anticipatory bail may be granted in such cases where the facts do not clearly establish criminal intent, subject to conditions ensuring the petitioner's cooperation with the trial and protection of evidence.
On this section: Criminal breach of trust - alleged offence in the FIR
The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.
Judgments citing this section
These may be obiter dicta or a precedent, for you to study. These are the judgments where this section is quoted.
-
… LEGAL SUBMISSIONS – COMMITTEE MEMBERS Sanction 437. The remaining accused, i.e. A-6 to A-62 are committee members and Chairpersons that have been convicted under Sections 418, 467 and 471 of The Indian Penal Code as well as under Section 13 of The Prevention of Corruption Act. Factually, sanction orders under Section 19 of The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 have only been obtained with respect to A-1, A-3, A-13, A-24, A-28, A-36, A-39, A-54 and A-59. Rest of the accused persons had …
-
… LEGAL SUBMISSIONS – COMMITTEE MEMBERS Sanction 437. The remaining accused, i.e. A-6 to A-62 are committee members and Chairpersons that have been convicted under Sections 418, 467 and 471 of The Indian Penal Code as well as under Section 13 of The Prevention of Corruption Act. Factually, sanction orders under Section 19 of The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 have only been obtained with respect to A-1, A-3, A-13, A-24, A-28, A-36, A-39, A-54 and A-59. Rest of the accused persons had …
-
… LEGAL SUBMISSIONS – COMMITTEE MEMBERS Sanction 437. The remaining accused, i.e. A-6 to A-62 are committee members and Chairpersons that have been convicted under Sections 418, 467 and 471 of The Indian Penal Code as well as under Section 13 of The Prevention of Corruption Act. Factually, sanction orders under Section 19 of The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 have only been obtained with respect to A-1, A-3, A-13, A-24, A-28, A-36, A-39, A-54 and A-59. Rest of the accused persons had …
Questions about Section 418
What have the courts held on Section 418 of the Indian Penal Code?
Internl. Adv. Res. Cen. for P. M. & N. M. vs Nimra Cerglass (p) Ltd. (22 Sep 2015) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: Cheating with knowledge that wrongful loss may be caused - originally charged in complaint but investigating officer concluded no offence was made out. Another 4 judgments on this section are set out below, 4 of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2014 to 2017.
How do I find court cases under Section 418 of the Indian Penal Code?
In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: IPC 418, section 418 IPC, section 418 of the Indian Penal Code. People searching for it also type ipc 418 in bns and ipc 418 punishment. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 5 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with Internl. Adv. Res. Cen. for P. M. & N. M. vs Nimra Cerglass (p) Ltd. (22 Sep 2015).
What should I read with Section 418 of the Indian Penal Code, and has it changed?
7 other provisions in this corpus refer back to it. For anything done on or after 1 July 2024 the provision to read is BNS 318 (Cheating), which replaced it; conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under this section.
When did Section 418 of the Indian Penal Code come into force?
Section 418 of the Indian Penal Code, cited as IPC 418, came into force on 01 Jan 1862, having been enacted on 06 Oct 1860. It is no longer in force.
Other sections of this Act
- 499. Defamation1512 words
- 464. Making a false document1223 words
- 300. Murder1172 words
- 378. Theft980 words
- 108. Abettor745 words
- 403. Dishonest misappropriation of property727 words
Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Recovered from the consolidated text published by India Code (item 7b7d4fe6-206b-4e33-81f1-b98b018acaf6). This page is not a substitute for legal advice.