1. The petitioner in this case has been summoned to answer a charge under Section 417, I.P.C. It appears from the petition of complaint which, for the purposes of this Rule, we must assume contains a true statement of the facts, that the Petitioner advertised in the Statesman, that he was willing to sell an almost new jazz set. The complainant Opposite Party answered the advertisement and after some correspondence paid Rs. 300 by cheque to the Petitioner. On receipt of the goods the complainant found that they were not of the quality he expected and also that certain articles mentioned in the list had not been sent to him. We hold that the allegations in the petition are insufficient to justify the prosecution of the Petitioner for a criminal offence. The case seems to come within the principle laid down in the leading English case, Regina v. Bryan  D.B. 265. In that case it was decided that the giving of untrue praise of article did not come within the English statute. What appears to have happened in the present case is that the Petitioner gave untrue praise of the goods which he was selling. The learned vakil for the complainant is unable to put his finger on any specific statement in the description of the goods and say that this statement is false. As an example of the misleading statements we may refer to one to which special attention is drawn in the complaint, that the goods are almost new. What is the meaning of the expression '' almost new ' is a matter on which the seller and the buyer of second hand goods will frequently be found to have very different ideas. As regards the omission to send certain goods it will be impossible for the complainant to prove that at the time the Petitioner made the promise to send the goods he did not intend to send all that was stated in the list. The Petitioner is greatly to blame for having refused to accept the letters of protest which were subsequently sent to him by the complainant. But we cannot on this ground hold that a criminal offence has been established.
2. The Rule is made absolute and the proceedings against the Petitioner are quashed.