Rs 1.4 crore for MBBS seat- Karnataka HC refuses to quash criminal proceedings against couple accused of cheating

Bengaluru: The Karnataka High Court bench comprising Justice M Nagaprasanna recently refused to quash criminal proceedings against a couple accused of cheating the family of a MBBS aspirant. The couple had allegedly duped the complainant of Rs 1.4 crore against the promise of securing a medical seat for her daughter.

While the couple had argued that it was a simple monetary transaction, the Karnataka HC bench observed, "The submission that the proceedings are merely a coercive device for recovery of money, therefore, cannot become a talisman by the mere utterance of the expression “civil dispute”. Every transaction involving money does not, by that circumstance alone, shed its criminal complexion."

Case Background:

Back in 2023, the complainant's daughter passed the 12th Standard Examination and appeared in the NEET examination. However, she did not secure an appropriate rank. Allegedly, the accused couple told the complainant that they had contacts with influential people who were capable of securing a MBBS seat for the complainant's daughter.

Relying on the said assurance, the complainant and her husband agreed to pay the accused an amount of Rs 35 lakh initially and paid the amount in cash at the hospital. Assuring that the admission process was going on and had reached a successful stage at a particular point, the accused instructed the complainant to transfer an additional Rs 1,05,00,000 into the bank account. Accordingly, the complainant and her husband paid Rs 1,40,00,000 in total to the accused couple for a medical seat.

Believing that a seat was being arranged, the complainant also submitted the required documents to the accused couple. However, allegedly, after receiving the amount, the accused began dodging the complainant, and following this, the complainant filed an FIR before the Kaggalipura Police Station.

The police registered a zero FIR and transferred it to Bagalagunte Police Station.

Challenging this, the accused couple approached the High Court and argued that it was a simple money transaction and a criminal case had been registered to recover the money.

Observations by High Court:

While considering the matter, the HC bench observed that the transaction between the petitioners and the complainant formed the very substratum of the complaint. Noting that the entire criminal process is set in motion on registration of the complaint, the bench perused the said complaint and noted, "If the allegations in the complaint are taken at their face value, what emerges is, not a mere case of money advanced and money remaining unpaid simpliciter. It is an allegation of a mother's aspiration for her daughter's medical education being converted into an instrument of exploitation. The complainant alleges that she was induced to part with `1.40/- crore on a representation which never translated into reality and, despite the passage of nearly two years, neither the object for which the money was paid nor the money itself came back to the complainant."

"What stares at the Court from the complaint is a stark circumstance—there is neither the medical seat nor the money. The seat promised never fructified; the money paid never returned. It is in this backdrop that the issue now falls for consideration is: whether the crime should be obliterated at its very threshold, merely on the plea that the criminal proceedings have been instituted as a device for recovery of money," it further noted.

However, the bench also observed that the cloak of a monetary transaction cannot, in every circumstance, be permitted to become a sanctuary for an allegation of criminality, if the ingredients of the offences alleged are otherwise prima facie discernible.

The bench referred to Sections 406 and 420 of the IPC, under which the petitioners (accused) were booked, and observed, "If the facts obtaining in the case at hand are juxtaposed with the ingredients of the offences alleged, what emerges is, even at the very threshold, is that the allegations prima facie travel through every ingredient necessary to constitute the offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of the IPC."

It was observed by the Court that for an offence of criminal breach of trust, the foundational requirement is entrustment of property or dominion over it.

"Entrustment, in the case at hand, is not a matter shrouded in ambiguity. The allegation is that, a staggering sum of `1,40,00,000/- came to be entrusted to accused Nos.1 and 2 for one singular and specific purpose—to secure a medical seat for the daughter of the complainant. The seat never came; neither did the money return. The allegation is that, the amount so entrusted was dishonestly appropriated by the accused to themselves. If these allegations are taken at their face value, as they must be at this nascent stage of investigation, the ingredients of Section 405 of the IPC prima facie stand attracted, thereby warranting investigation into the offence punishable under Section 406 of the IPC," it noted.

"The other offence alleged is the one punishable under Section 420 of the IPC, the ingredients of which are housed in Section 415 of the IPC, extracted supra. The sine qua non for the offence of cheating is deception coupled with dishonest intention at the inception of the transaction, which induces the person deceived to part with property. The complaint paints precisely such a picture. The complainant, nurturing the natural aspiration of a parent to see her daughter don the mantle of a doctor, is alleged to have been lured into parting with `1,40,00,000/- on the solemn assurance that a medical seat would be secured for her daughter. The allegation is not of a mere promise subsequently gone awry. It is that the petitioners held themselves out as persons possessing influential contacts and the ability to secure the coveted medical seat, induced the complainant to part with an enormous sum of money on the strength of that representation, and thereafter neither secured the seat nor returned the money," it further noted.

The bench noted that if the petitioners, from the very beginning, were conscious that the assurance held out by them was one incapable of fulfilment, the representation ceases to be an innocent promise and prima facie assumes the colour of deception.

"The dishonest intention would then be embedded in the very genesis of the transaction. Therefore, the ingredients of Section 415 of the IPC prima facie, emerge from the complaint, making out an offence punishable under Section 420 of the IPC. These are matters which necessarily require the probe of investigation and cannot be throttled at its threshold," observed the bench.

"At first blush, two features may appear to lend some colour to the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioners—one, the delay in registration of the crime; and the other, the contention that criminal law has been set in motion merely as an instrument for recovery of money. But these are only impressions on the periphery. A deeper gaze into the allegations, unfolds an altogether different picture. What is alleged is not a simple commercial transaction that has soured with the passage of time, nor a mere breach of promise sought to be dressed in criminal colours. The allegation is of a calculated inducement: the aspiration of a parent to secure a medical seat for her daughter being tapped, an assurance of influence being held out, a colossal sum of `1,40,00,000/- being extracted on the strength of that assurance, and thereafter, both the promised seat and the money vanishing from the complainant's reach," it further noted.

Accordingly, the bench denied agreeing with the submission that the proceedings were merely a coercive device to recover money. It held that every transaction involving money does not, by that circumstance alone, shed its criminal complexion.

"Where the very foundation of the transaction is alleged to have been laid in deception and the victim is induced to part with property on a representation which, from its inception, is alleged to have been dishonest, the cloak of a civil transaction cannot be permitted to smother a legitimate criminal investigation," held the bench.

Addressing the delay on the part of the complainants to approach the police, the bench observed that the delay would not, at this stage, efface the allegations in the complaint.

"The allegation itself is that, the petitioners continued to hold out assurances and dodged the complainant, either in securing the promised medical seat or in returning the money, for close to two years. Whether that explanation is ultimately worthy of acceptance is a matter that investigation may unravel; it cannot become a ground to guillotine the crime at its very inception," it observed.

Accordingly, denying granting relief to the accused (petitioners), the bench concluded, "Therefore, what appears on the surface as a delayed complaint concerning recovery of money, on a deeper delving, prima facie reveals the contours of a calculated act of cheating alleged against accused Nos.1 and 2. The criminal law, having only just been set in motion, cannot be commanded to halt before the investigating agency is afforded an opportunity to separate the grain from the chaff. To obliterate the crime at this embryonic stage would amount to stifling an investigation into allegations which, on their face, disclose cognizable offences. The petitions, therefore, cannot merit acceptance merely on the plea of delay or on the attempted characterization of the transaction as one purely civil in nature."

To view the order, click on the link below:

https://medicaldialogues.in/pdf_upload/2026/09/10/karnataka-hc-medical-seat-scam-475025.pdf

Also Read: Woman Duped of Rs 1.13 Crore in Medical Seat Scam, Pune Couple Booked