IMPORTANT POINT
Merely because charge-sheet is filed cannot be a ground for High Court to not invoke its jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.

JUDGMENT :

B.R. GAVAI, J.

CRIMINAL APPEAL @ SLP (CRIMINAL) NO. 8922 OF 2022

1. Leave granted.

2. The present appeal challenges the order passed by the learned Single Judge of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad dated 23rd August 2022, rejecting the petition filed by the present appellants for quashing of the First Information Report (for short ‘FIR’).

3. The complainant had filed the complaint that the initial permission for providing admission was granted to Raj School of Nursing and Paramedical College, Gorakhpur (for short ‘the said institute’) for sixty seats but subsequently the permission was reduced to forty seats. However, in spite of reduction of number of seats, the said institute had admitted sixty students. When the result of twenty students was not published, the said students came to know about the fact that twenty students were illegally admitted and as such the complaints came to be filed by some of those students. One of such complaints was filed by Respondent No. 2 herein. On the basis of such complaints, an FIR bearing Case Crime No. 18 of 2015 came to be registered in Police Station Kotwali, District Gorakhpur, Uttar Pradesh.

4. The averments made in the FIR are that one Dr. Rajaram Yadav is the Manager of the said institute, Dr. Abhishek Yadav is the Director and Dr. C. Prasad is the Principal of the said institute. The averments are that sixty seats were advertised in the newspapers and the complainant was given allurement that her admission was against a sanctioned strength and as such she was induced to pay a huge amount. The FIR was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 406, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘IPC’).

5. Subsequently, the complainant realized that her admission was not against the sanctioned strength. As such, she lodged the complaint alleging therein that she was induced to take admission in the college by giving an impression that her admission was against a sanctioned seat and further induced her to pay a huge amount. As such, it was averred that the accused persons had cheated the complainant.

6. The three petitioners (appellants herein), invoking the jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short “Cr.P.C.”), filed a petition for quashing of the said FIR on the ground that no case was made out against them. The High Court, while referring to the various judgments of this Court, observed that the defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage. The High Court further observed that the petitioners (appellants herein) had an alternative remedy to apply for discharge under Section 239 or 227 or 245 of the Cr.P.C. The High Court, therefore refused to entertain the petition and rejected it in limine. This Court, vide order dated 30th September 2022, issued interim direction restraining the respondents from taking any coercive steps against the appellants herein.

7. We have heard Shri Prem Prakash, learned counsel appearing for the appellants and Shri Ravindra Kumar Raizada, learned Additional Advocate General for the State of Uttar Pradesh.

8. Shri Prem Prakash, learned counsel, submits that the appellants herein are not at all involved with the said institute; they are neither the office bearers nor entrusted with the duties of the day-to-day management of the said institute. It is therefore submitted that the High Court erred in refusing to quash the proceedings against the appellants herein.

9. Shri Raizada, per contra, submits that one of the appellants is the wife of the Director and the second appellant is the sister of the Director and daughter of the Manager and the third appellant is an employee of the said institute. It is submitted that, as such the appellants herein were not involved in the illegalities committed by the said institute. It is further submitted that in any case, since the charge-sheet has already been filed, the appellants can very well apply f