Court upholds dismissal of cheating complaint against Sunny Leone, husband

A sessions court in Mumbai has upheld the dismissal of a cheating complaint against Bollywood actor Sunny Leone and her husband, holding that the dispute arose from an alleged breach of a commercial contract and did not make out a criminal case against the couple. Additional Sessions Judge P A Sane of the Dindoshi court dismissed a criminal revision application filed by complainant Omprakash Shreenarayan Lal Jain, who had accused Leone, her husband and their manager of cheating him over payments linked to a Telugu film. Jain had challenged an October 10, 2024 order of a Judicial Magistrate First Class in Andheri rejecting his complaint under Sections 406 (criminal breach of trust), 420 (cheating) and 506(II) (criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code.

Dispute over film payment

According to the complaint, Jain had facilitated a role for Leone in a Telugu film. He claimed that an arrangement was reached under which he was to receive a percentage-based incentive from the total consideration of Rs 1.75 crore.

Jain alleged that although he received partial payments, an outstanding amount and his commission were not paid. He subsequently approached the magistrate court alleging criminal breach of trust, cheating and intimidation. After the magistrate rejected his complaint, Jain moved the sessions court, contending that the lower court had dismissed it without properly considering the material before it.

The sessions court, however, found no grounds to interfere with the magistrate's decision. The judge noted that documents submitted in the case, including tax invoices and communications concerning settlement, indicated that the disagreement stemmed from a commercial transaction between the parties.

No ingredients of criminal offence

The court observed that the allegations essentially concerned an agreement between the parties and an alleged failure to honour its terms. “It is alleged that the parties entered into a contract and there is nothing but a mere breach of contract,” the court said, adding that the material did not establish the ingredients required for criminal breach of trust or criminal intimidation.

The court also found that the complainant had failed to produce evidence establishing the essential ingredients necessary to make out an offence of cheating.

For a contractual dispute to acquire a criminal dimension, the necessary elements of the alleged criminal offences must be demonstrated rather than inferred merely from non-payment or failure to fulfil contractual obligations.

Finding no illegality, material irregularity or perversity in the magistrate court's October 2024 order, the sessions judge dismissed Jain's revision application, leaving the earlier dismissal of the criminal complaint against Leone, her husband and their manager intact.