The absence of specific allegations against the petitioner in a criminal complaint warrants quashing of proceedings under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to prevent abuse of process.

ORDER:

V. Sujatha, J.

This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioner/A2 seeking to quash the proceedings in Cr.No.50 of 2020, dated 06.03.2020 of Sullurupet Police Station, Nellore District registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 r/w 34 of IPC .

2. The petitioner herein as A2 and respondent No.2 is the defacto complainant. The defacto complainant lodged a complaint alleging that the accused, who were running Team Educational Solutions, induced the defacto complainant to believe that they would arrange Medical seat for her daughter at Raja Rajeswari Medical College, Bangalore, if she arranged Rs.50,00,000/-. Trusting the words of the accused, the defacto complainant deposited Rs.50,00,000/- into the account of A1 and also in other accounts as instructed by A1. However, A1 did not arrange medical seat for the complainant‟s daughter. When the complainant and her husband approached the accused and demanded the return of the money, they claimed that the money had already been spent and refused to refund it. Thus, the accused misappropriated the Rs.50,00,000/- given by the defacto complainant and cheated her by failing to provide the medical seat for her daughter as promised by them. On the basis of the said complaint, a case in Crime No.50 of 2020 has been registered for the offence punishable under Section 406 and 420 of IPC on the file of Sullurupet Police station. The present petitioner is filed to quash the said crime No.50 of 2020.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner/A2 is innocent and has not committed any offence as alleged in the complaint. He further argued that, in order to gain wrongful advantage, the 2^nd respondent has lodged the present complaint. With regard to the allegations against the petitioner, there is no specific averment that attracts offences under Sections 406 , 420 r/w 34 of IPC , except the allegation that when the 2^nd respondent approached the petitioner/A2, he refused to repay the money received from the defacto complainant. The police, without verifying the incident or the involvement of petitioner/A2, falsely implicated him in this crime solely to harass him. Therefore, petitioner/A2 prays for the petition to be allowed.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the 2^nd respondent contended that the petitioner was fully aware of the facts. The petitioner/A2 and A1 collected Rs.50,00,000/- from the defacto complainant, which they misappropriated for their own use by committing criminal breach of trust. However, neither petitioner/A2 nor A1 provided the medical seat to complainant‟s daughter, nor returned the money taken from the complainant.

5. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor too concurred with the submission made by the learned counsel for the 2^nd respondent.

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:

“Whether the proceedings against the petitioner in Crime No.50 of 2020 of Sullurpeta Police Station, Nellore District are liable to be quashed by exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C .?”

7. The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C . 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