1. Challenge to High Court order dismissing a petition to quash an FIR under Section 482 Cr.P.C. based on non-compliance with Section 167(5) Cr.P.C. (West Bengal amendment). (Para 2 , 3 )
Back
Next 
2024 Supreme(SC) 1314
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
J.K. Maheshwari, Rajesh Bindal, JJ.
Sabir Ahamed Najar – Appellant
Versus
The State of West Bengal – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 4862 of 2024 (Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 947 of 2024)
Decided On : 28-11-2024
Important Points
The court affirmed the appellant's right to challenge the sanction order and clarified that prior observations should not influence the merits of the case.
Subject
Criminal Law - Procedure
Act Referred
Headnote
(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 482 - High Court dismissed petition to quash FIR for non-compliance with Section 167(5) - Appellant contended that the dismissal foreclosed his right to challenge the order of sanction - Court allowed liberty to challenge the sanction order and take recourse under Section 167(5) - Observations made by the High Court shall not influence the decision on merits. (Paras 3, 6, 7)
Facts of the case:
The appellant filed a petition under Section 482 to quash FIR No. 287/2014 for offences under IPC, claiming non-compliance with Section 167(5) of Cr.P.C. The High Court dismissed the petition, making observations regarding the merits of the sanction order.
Findings of Court:
The court found substance in the appellant's contention and allowed him to challenge the sanction order and take recourse under Section 167(5) of Cr.P.C.
Issues: The main issue was whether the appellant could challenge the order of sanction after the High Court's dismissal of the Section 482 petition.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the appellant retains the right to challenge the sanction order and that the High Court's observations should not influence the merits of the case.
Result: Special Leave Petition disposed of with directions.
Facts of the case:
The appellant filed a petition under Section 482 to quash FIR No. 287/2014 for offences under IPC, claiming non-compliance with Section 167(5) of Cr.P.C. The High Court dismissed the petition, making observations regarding the merits of the sanction order.
Findings of Court:
The court found substance in the appellant's contention and allowed him to challenge the sanction order and take recourse under Section 167(5) of Cr.P.C.
Issues: The main issue was whether the appellant could challenge the order of sanction after the High Court's dismissal of the Section 482 petition.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the appellant retains the right to challenge the sanction order and that the High Court's observations should not influence the merits of the case.
Result: Special Leave Petition disposed of with directions.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Abhishek Gupta, AOR, Mr. Zafar Inayat, Adv., Mr. Nikhil Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. Praful Shukla, Adv.
For the Respondent: Ms. Mantika Haryani, Adv., Ms. Astha Sharma, AOR Ms. Muskan Surana, Adv.
For the Petitioner: Mr. Abhishek Gupta, AOR, Mr. Zafar Inayat, Adv., Mr. Nikhil Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. Praful Shukla, Adv.
For the Respondent: Ms. Mantika Haryani, Adv., Ms. Astha Sharma, AOR Ms. Muskan Surana, Adv.
Table of Contents
2. Inappropriateness of Section 482 Cr.P.C. petition and contention that High Court observations on the sanction order's merits foreclosed the right to challenge the sanction. (Para 3 , 5 )
3. Recourse to Section 482 Cr.P.C. was inappropriate for issues pertaining to Section 167(5) Cr.P.C. (West Bengal amendment). (Para 5 )
4. Liberty to challenge a sanction order should be granted to ensure the issue is decided on its own merits, uninfluenced by prior observations. (Para 6 )
5. SLP disposed of granting liberty to seek recourse under Section 167(5) Cr.P.C. and challenge the sanction order, to be decided on merits uninfluenced by the impugned order. (Para 6 )
6. Is Section 482 Cr.P.C. the appropriate remedy for non-compliance with Section 167(5) Cr.P.C. (West Bengal amendment)?
No, the court observed that recourse to a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. was inappropriate for addressing issues under Section 167(5) of the Cr.P.C. (as amended by the State of West Bengal). (Para 5 )
7. Can a party challenge a sanction order if a previous court order made observations on its merits?
Yes, the court held that a party may be granted liberty to challenge a sanction order as per law, and such challenge should be decided on its own merits, uninfluenced by observations made in a previous order. (Para 6 )
ORDER :
1. Leave granted.
2. Being aggrieved by the order dated 20.11.2023 whereby the High Court dismissed CRR No. 3002 of 2023 filed by the appellant under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.), the appellant has approached this Court.
3. It is contended by the appellant that a petition under Section 482 was filed to quash the FIR No. 287/2014 dated 14.12.2014 registered at Police Station Rampurhat, District Birbhum, West Bengal for the offences punishable under Sections, 489B, 489C read with 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, on the ground of non-compliance with the provisions of Section 167(5) of the Cr.P.C. (as amended by the State of West Bengal). During the pendency of the said Section 482 Cr.P.C. petition, sanction order was passed by the State of West Bengal on 02.11.2023. However, the Court dismissed the Section 482 Cr.P.C. petition making some observations regarding the merits of the order of sanction.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned counsel for the State.
5. From a perusal of the provisions of Section 167(5) of the Cr.P.C. (as amended by the State of West Bengal), it is evident that recourse to file the petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. was inappropriate. At this stage, the learned counsel for the appellant submits that he would not press the Section 482 Cr.P.C. petition and take recourse as permissible under Section 167(5) of the Cr.P.C. It is further contended by him that he wishes to challenge the order of sanction, however, by the impugned order, his right to challenge has been foreclosed with certain observations made by the High Court. Therefore, liberty may be granted to challenge the order of sanction raising the grounds as permissible, which may be decided by the High Court uninfluenced by the observations made in the order impugned.
6. After hearing learned counsel for the appellant, we find substance in the said contention. Therefore, we dispose of this Special Leave Petition with the following directions :
i) The appellant is at liberty to take recourse as permissible to him under Section 167(5) of the Cr.P.C. (as amended by the State of West Bengal)
ii) The appellant is also at liberty to take recourse to challenge the order of sanction dated 02.11.2023 as per law.
iii) If the challenge is made by the petitioner, it shall be decided on its own merits, uninfluenced by any observations made in the order impugned.
7. We make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on any of the issues as raised before us and the court before whom the recourse is taken by the appellant may decide the issues on its own merits.
8. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.
