Hira Lal Hari Lal Bhagwati Vs CBI (2003) 5 SCC 257

Hon'ble Supreme Court of India observed, 'for establishing the offence of cheating, the complainant is required to show that the accused had fraudulent or dishonest intention at the time of making promise or representation. From his failure to keep promise subsequently, such a culpable intention right at the beginning cannot be presumed.'

Vir Prakash Sharma Vs Anil Kumar Agarwal (2007) 7 SCC 373

Hon'ble Supreme Court observed,“The ingredients of Section 420 of the Penal Code are as follows: (i) Deception of any persons;
(ii) Fraudulently or dishonestly inducing any person to deliver any property; or
(iii) To consent that any person shall retain any property and finally intentionally inducing that person to do or omit to do anything which he would not do or omit. No act of inducement on the part of the appellant has been alleged by the respondent. No allegation has been made that he had an intention to cheat the respondent from the very inception.”

S V L Murthy etc Vs CBI (2009) 6 SCC 77

Hon'ble Supreme Court observed, “An offence of cheating cannot be said to have been made out unless the following ingredients are satisfied: ( i) deception of a person either by making a false or misleading representation or by other action or omission; (ii) fraudulently or dishonestly inducing any person to deliver any property; or ( iii) to consent that any person shall retain any property and finally intentionally inducing that person to do or omit to do anything which he would not do or omit. For the purpose of constituting an offence of cheating, the complainant is required to show that the accused had fraudulent or dishonest intention at the time of making promise or representation. Even in a case where allegations are made in regard to failure on the part of the accused to keep his promise, in the absence of a culpable intention at the time of making initial promise being absent, no offence under Section 420 of the Penal Code can be said to have been made out.”