Karnataka HC Notices Sri Lankan Judge's Rights Plea
07 Mar 2026
Karnataka Proposes Social Media Ban for Under-16s
07 Mar 2026
Justice Dharmadhikari Sworn In as 55th Madras HC Chief Justice
07 Mar 2026
Punjab HC Acquits Ram Rahim in Journalist Murder
07 Mar 2026
Appellate Courts Can Rely on Unexhibited Public Documents Produced by Plaintiff: Gujarat High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Under Section 100 CPC
07 Mar 2026
Punjab & Haryana HC Denies Anticipatory Bail in Murder via Humiliation Case: Sections 103(1) & 3(5) BNS
07 Mar 2026
Security Deposit Forfeiture Without Show-Cause Notice Violates Natural Justice: Himachal Pradesh High Court
07 Mar 2026
S.202 CrPC Inquiry Not Mandatory for Public Servant Complaints If Accused Outside Jurisdiction: Supreme Court
09 Mar 2026
Professor MP Singh: Shaper of Constitutional Discourse
09 Mar 2026
ABHAY S. OKA, AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH
Suresh C. Singal – Appellant
Versus
State of Gujarat – Respondent
Headnote: Read headnote
JUDGMENT :
(AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J.)
1. The Appellants have challenged the Order dated 05.05.2017 passed by the learned Single Judge of the High Court of Gujarat in Special Criminal Application (Quashing) No.5629 of 2015, whereby a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution was preferred by the Appellants seeking quashing of FIR being RC No.13(E)/2008-CBI dated 08.12.2008 at Police Station, CBI, BS & FC, Mumbai as well as the charge sheet dated 26.05.2010 was dismissed.
2. The bare necessary facts in the present case are that between 1998-2005 Bank of Maharashtra sanctioned multiple credit facilities to the Appellants due to their strong financial standing. Beginning June 2005 onwards, the Appellant companies faced a financial crunch due to adverse market conditions, including the 2004 Surat floods, leading to the bank classifying their loans/credit facilities as Non-Performing Assets (hereinafter referred to as “NPA”). Bank of Maharashtra proceeded to file applications for recovery of the debt before the Debt Recovery Tribunal, Ahmedabad (hereinafter referred to as “DRT”).
Exercise of inherent jurisdiction – Stage and timing of settlement play a crucial role in determination as to whether to exercise power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. 1973 or not.
Redundant criminal proceedings should not be allowed to continue.
The court emphasized that economic offences involving the financial and economic well-being of the State have implications beyond private disputes, and the gravity of such offences must be considered....
The court emphasized the wide amplitude of inherent powers under section 482 of Cr.P.C. and the principles governing the exercise of such powers, highlighting the nature and gravity of the offence, p....
One Time Settlement can quash criminal proceedings in cases lacking evidence of fraud or forgery.
When matter has been compromised between borrower and Bank, continuation of criminal proceedings would not be justifiable.
Economic offences cannot be quashed based on settlement due to their serious implications for public interest.
Section 482 preserves inherent powers of High Court to prevent an abuse of process of any court or to secure ends of justice.
Serious economic offences, such as forgery and corruption, cannot be quashed based on private settlements due to their impact on society and public interest.
Central Bureau of Investigation, ACB, Mumbai v. Narendra Lal Jain and Others
-
Read summaryGian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another
-
Read summaryGold Quest International Private Limited v. State of Tamil Nadu and Others
-
Read summaryB.S. Joshi and Others v. State of Haryana and Another
-
Read summaryCentral Bureau of Investigation, SPE, SIU (X), New Delhi v. Duncans Agro Industries Ltd., Calcutta
-
Read summaryNikhil Merchant v. Central Bureau of Investigation and Another
-
Read summaryNarinder Singh and Others v. State of Punjab and Another
-
Read summaryCentral Bureau of Investigation v. Jagjit Singh
-
Read summaryState of Maharashtra v. Vikram Anantrai Doshi and Others
-
Read summaryParbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai and Others v. The State of Gujarat and Others
-
Read summarySushil Suri v. Central Bureau of Investigation and Another
-
Read summaryK. Bharthi Devi and Another v. State of Telangana and Another
-
Read summary
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.