SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2000 Supreme(SC) 688

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
G.B.Pattanaik : U.C.Banerjee
Vitoori Pradeep Kumar
Versus
Kaisula Dharmaiah
Case No. : 325 of 2000
Date of Decision : 4/3/00

Headnote:

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 482 - Indian Penal Code, Section 420 -Quashing of criminal proceeding pending civil suit- Pending civil for specific performance, criminal proceedings for cheating under Section 420 IPC , initiated against the respondents- The High Court quashed the criminal proceedings on the ground that the criminal case could not proceed because of the pendency of a civil suit- Not proper- The Magistrate observed that there existed sufficient material to proceed with the criminal case and therefore prayer for discharge was rejected- In such circumstances order of the High Court set aside- Criminal proceedings directed to continued. [Para 2]

(1) LEAVE granted.

(2) THE order of learned Single Judge of Andhra Pradesh High Court passed in Criminal Revision No. 602/1999 allowing the revision filed, by the accused persons on the ground that the criminal case cannot proceed because of the pendency of a civil suit is the subject matter of the challenge in this Court. As it appears, before the learned Magistrate, an application for discharge was filed, but the Magistrate was of the opinion that there exist sufficient material to proceed with the criminal case and, therefore, prayer for discharge was rejected. Accused then moved the High Court and High Court by the impugned order has quashed the criminal proceedings. The impugned proceedings is in relation to an allegation of an offence of cheating under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code. The so-called civil suit is a suit for specific performance. We see no justification on the part of the High Court under such circumstances to direct that the criminal proceedings should be quashed. More so, there is an earlier order of the High Court itself. In this view of the matter, we set aside the impugned order of the High Court and direct that the criminal proceedings should be continued. We make it clear that any observation made, will not bind the Magistrate.

(3) THE appeal is disposed of.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top