VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
Satvala Balachowri, S/O. Chennappa – Appellant
Versus
State Of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. By Tadepalli Police Station, Guntur Urban District, Through Public Prosecutor – Respondent
ORDER :
Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa, J.
The instant petition under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973[for short ‘Cr.P.C’] has been filed by the Petitioner/Accused seeking quashment of proceedings against him in Crime No.98 of 2020 on the file of Tadepalli Police Station, Guntur Urban District registered for the offences under Sections 448, 354, 354A, 354D of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.[ for short ‘IPC’]
2. The facts of the case, in epitome, are as follows:
b. As such, Respondent No.2 lodged a complaint against the Petitioner stating that due to his harassment, Sujatha had committed suicide. The said complaint was registered as a case in Crime No.98 of 2020 for the
Anju Chaudhary v. State of Uttar Pradesh and another (2013) 6 SCC 384
The court established that distinct allegations in separate FIRs can justify the continuation of criminal proceedings.
The court ruled that criminal proceedings should not be used to settle civil disputes and can be quashed if they do not establish a prima facie case of criminal offence.
The court quashed criminal proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. as the allegations did not constitute a criminal offence and were purely civil in nature.
The court affirmed that criminal proceedings cannot be quashed solely on the basis that the allegations may also constitute a civil wrong, emphasizing the need for trial to determine the merits.
The court emphasized that inherent powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. should be exercised cautiously, allowing investigations unless no cognizable offence is disclosed.
The court emphasized that inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. are to prevent abuse of process and secure justice, and quashing of FIR should be exercised sparingly.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the power of the High Court to quash criminal proceedings when they are manifestly attended with mala fides and instituted with ulterior motives....
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 main legal point established in the judgment is that a second complaint relating to the same incident is not prohibited under the Code, and if it presents a different version with additional alle....
Inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. are to prevent abuse of process and secure justice, exercised sparingly, allowing investigations to proceed unless no cognizable offence is disclosed.
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.