Back
NAVIN SINHA, B.R.GAVAI
M. Srikanth – Appellant
Versus
State Of Telangana – Respondent
What is the correct legal test under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing proceedings in cases involving civil disputes over property inheritance? What is the Court’s conclusion regarding accused No. 4’s continued criminal proceedings in light of Bhajan Lal categories? What are the circumstances under which a criminal proceeding can be quashed when civil litigation is pending on the same facts?
Key Points: - The judgment discusses Bhajan Lal categories as tests to quash under Section 482 Cr.P.C. (!) - It applies Bhajan Lal categories (especially categories (1) and (3)) to determine that no material exists to proceed against accused No. 4, rendering continuation of proceedings an abuse of process (!) - It notes civil disputes and pending civil suits related to inheritance and property as factors for quashing when allegations do not prima facie constitute an offence (!) - It records that the High Court should have applied the same parameters to accused No. 4 as to other accused whose petitions were allowed (!) - The Supreme Court quashes the criminal proceedings against accused No. 4 and dismisses the appeals challenging quashing qua others (!)
JUDGMENT :
B.R. GAVAI, J.
Leave granted in both the Special Leave Petitions.
2. Both these appeals arise out of the common Judgment and Order passed by the single Judge of High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh dated 01.06.2017.
3. The criminal appeal arising out of S.L.P. (Crl.) No. 9156 of 2017 filed by M. Srikanth, the original accused No. 4, challenges that part of the order by which the single Judge of the High Court has rejected his application under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. for quashing the proceedings in Crime No. 311/2010 of P.S., Central Crime Station, Hyderabad. The criminal appeals arising out of S.L.P. (Crl.) Nos. 9160-9161 of 2017 at the instance of the original complainant challenge that part of the order vide which the single Judge of the High Court has quashed the complaint qua accused Nos. 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9.
4. The facts, in brief, giving rise to the present appeals are as under:
The parties are referred to herein as they are arrayed in the original complaint. The Respondent No. 2, Fatima Hasna, in the criminal appeal arising out of S.L.P. (Crl.) No. 9156 of 2017 (hereinafter referred to as “the complainant”), i
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
