Clients cannot initiate cheating cases against advocates because the court passed an unfavorable order.

Case: KS Mahadevan v Cyprian Menezes & Anr
Court: Justice Suraj Govindaraj
 
The Karnataka High Court observed that a client could not file a cheating case against his advocate simply because the court passed an unfavorable order.
 
The single bench said that litigants should understand a case would be decided based on merits. 
 
Facts
                                                                  
The complainants alleged that the petitioner portrayed himself as a Senior Advocate in Bangalore, having connections with Senior Advocates in the Apex Court. He misrepresented that he could put across the complainant to such Advocates who could obtain favorable orders from the Supreme Court. Given the same, various amounts were paid to the petitioner to be paid to the other senior advocate appearing before the SC and other travel expenses. 
 
However, since the petitioner (advocate) did not obtain favorable orders from the SC in the case, a complaint was filed against him for cheating under the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
 
HELD
 
The court said that the outcome depends on the facts and the law applicable to the matter. Payment of fees is not relevant to the outcome of the matter. It is a private matter between the client and the advocate.
 
In light of the same, the single bench observed that the allegations against the petitioners that since a tremendous amount was paid as fees, the advocate had to obtain favorable orders was unsustainable and did it attract offense under Section 406 and 420 of IPC.
 
The bench, therefore, quashed the proceedings pending before Judicial Magistrate First Class-II, Mangaluru.