IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
V.Sujatha, J.
P.Rajani Kumari and others - Petitioners
Versus
State of AP and others - Respondents
Criminal Petition No: 1266/2019
Decided On : 06-08-2024
Quash - Criminal Proceedings - Section 482 of Cr.P.C. - The court emphasized the inherent powers under Section 482 to prevent abuse of process, highlighting that civil disputes should not be criminalized, leading to the quashing of proceedings against the petitioners.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners sought to quash criminal proceedings against them for allegedly trespassing and causing damage to property owned by the 2nd respondent, who had previously violated injunction orders against them.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the allegations against the petitioners were based on a civil dispute and that the complaint was an attempt to convert a civil matter into a criminal one, which constituted an abuse of process.
Issues: Whether the proceedings against the petitioners in Crime No.276 of 2018 should be quashed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that criminal proceedings cannot be maintained when the matter is purely civil in nature and that the inherent powers of the High Court should be exercised to prevent abuse of the judicial process.
Result: The criminal petition is allowed, quashing the proceedings against the petitioners.
ORDER :
V.Sujatha, J.
This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioners/accused No.1 and 3 seeking to quash the proceedings in Cr.No.276 of 2018 of Bommuru Police Station, Rajamahendravaram (Urban) East Godavari District.
2. Brief facts of the complaint are that the 2nd respondent owns a land to an extent of 155, 502 and 507 Sq.yards in R.S.No.312/1, 312/1A near RTC complex road and he also obtained electrical connection service on the said land and continuously paying the electricity bills and he is in peaceful possession of the said land. While so, the accused Nos.1 to 3 and some others trespassed into the said land highhandedly on 17.10.2018 at about 8 P.M. at RTC complex road, Rajamahendravaram caused damage to the electric meter, tried to raise construction and also threatened with dire consequences.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners herein are innocents and a false case has been foisted against them. The 1st petitioner herein is mother of 2nd petitioner and the 2nd petitioner is absolute owner of the subject property. On 20.12.2013, the petitioners herein obtained injunction orders on the alleged property along with other properties against the 2nd respondent and others, in O.S.No.380 of 2013 on the file of I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Rajamahendravaram, East Godavri District. On 16.11.2017, when the 2nd respondent and their men violated the said injunction orders, on the complaint made by the petitioners herein, a case in Cr.No.402 of 2017 was registered against the 2nd respondent herein. When the police did not taken any action, the petitioners approached this Hon’ble High Court vide W.P.No.30127 of 2018 which was disposed of directing that the investigation being completed by the police and filed a report within a period of two (2) months. The petitioners herein also filed E.P.No.56 of 2017 in O.S.No.380 of 2013 for violation of the injunction orders before the I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Rajamahendravaram against the 2nd respondent. The petitioners herein also got police protection orders from this Court in C.R.P.No.1438 of 2018 on 06.07.2018 and further stated that under the above mentioned circumstances the present complaint is registered as against the petitioner, which is purely a false case and prays to allow the petition.
4. None appeared for the 2nd respondent.
5. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor contended that the alleged acts of the petitioners are sufficient to conclude that the petitioners committed offence punishable under Sections 427, 447 and 506 read with 34 of I.P.C. and requested to dismiss the petition.
6. Having heard the submissions made by the learned counsel representing both parties and on perusal of the material available on record, the point that arises for consideration is as follows:
The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.
7. Section 482 of Cr.P.C saves the inherent powers of the High Court to make such orders as may be necessary to give effect to any order under the Code or to prevent abuse of the process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. It is an obvious proposition that when a Court has authority to make an order, it must have also power to carry that order into effect. If an order can lawfully be made, it must be carried out; otherwise it would be useless to make it. The authority of the Court exists for the advancement of justice, and if any attempt is made to abuse that authority so as to produce injustice, the Court must have power to prevent that abuse. In the absence of such power the administration of law would fail to serve the purpose for which alone the Court exists, namely to promote justice and to prevent injustice. Section 482 of Cr.P.C confers no new powers b
Mohd. Khalid Khan Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh
Paramjeet Batra Vs. State of Uttarakhand and others
Mohammed Ibrahim and Ors. v. State of Bihar and another
Mrs.Dhanalakshmi v. R.Prasanna Kumar
The court established that civil disputes should not be cloaked as criminal offenses to avoid abuse of the judicial process.
The court established that civil disputes should not be cloaked as criminal offenses to avoid abuse of the judicial process.
Criminal proceedings cannot be maintained when the underlying dispute is purely civil, as it constitutes an abuse of the judicial process.
The court held that criminal proceedings cannot continue when the underlying dispute is civil in nature, to prevent abuse of the judicial process.
Criminal proceedings cannot be maintained when the underlying dispute is purely civil, to prevent abuse of the judicial process.
The court established that criminal proceedings cannot be maintained when the underlying dispute is purely civil in nature.
The High Court can quash criminal proceedings under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to prevent abuse of process when complaints are motivated by civil disputes.
Criminal proceedings cannot be maintained when the underlying dispute is purely civil, especially if a civil suit is pending.
The court emphasized that inherent powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. should be exercised sparingly to prevent abuse of process and secure ends of justice, especially when allegations do not con....
The court established that civil disputes should not be pursued as criminal cases to prevent abuse of legal processes.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.