Inordinate delay in filing a complaint, lacking substantive evidence, warrants quashing of criminal proceedings to prevent abuse of the court's process.

ORDER :

1. In this petition, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs:

“a. Quash the entire charge sheet dated 29.04.2023 in C.C.No.19418/2023 filed by the Respondent No.1 police pending on the file of IV ACJM at Bengaluru for the offence punishable under Section 420 , 406 r/w. 34 of INDIAN PENAL CODE .

b. Pass any other order/s as it may deem fit to the facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice.”

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent and perused the material on record.

3. Though respondent No.2 was served with notice, she has remained unrepresented and has not chosen to contest the petition.

4. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that respondent No.2-defacto complainant filed a private complaint against accused No.3 and seven other persons i.e., accused Nos.1, 2 and 4 to 8 complaining that they had committed offences punishable under Sections 420 , 383, 120B, 406 r/w. Section 34 of IPC. Learned magistrate having referred the matter for investigation, FIR in Crime No.235/2022 dated 02.09.2022 was registered against the petitioner accused No.3 and other accused persons, pursuant to which a charge sheet was filed by the respondent-Police, which is currently pending in C.C.No.19418/2023 before the trial Court for the offences punishable under Sections 406 , 420 r/w. Section 34 of IPC.

5. In this context, a perusal of the material on record will indicate that the complainant alleges that the instant transaction took place way back in the year 2020 and there is absolutely no explanation offered as to the long and inordinate delay and latches on the part of respondent No.2 in relation to the event/transaction that took place two years ago. In the case of Chanchalapati Das Vs. State of West Bengal , 2023 SCC OnLine SC 650, the Apex Court held as under;

“Leave granted. Both the appeals arise out of the common judgment and order dated 22-3-2017 passed by the High Court of Calcutta in Chanchalpati Das v. State of West Bengal , 2017 SCC OnLine Cal 1588 whereby the High Court has dismissed both the criminal revision applications seeking quashing of the charge-sheet filed against the appellants-accused, in respect of FIR No. 33 of 2009 registered at Ballygunge Police Station, for the offences under Sections 468, 471, 406 and 120-B of the Penal Code, 1860.

2. As transpiring from the record, the appellant Madhu Pandit Das (Accused 1) is the President of ISKCON, Bengaluru since 1984 and the appellant Chanchalpati Das (Accused 2) is the Vice-President of ISKCON, Bengaluru since 1985. Both of them claim to be the global spiritual leaders and humanitarians. According to the appellants, the International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON), Bengaluru, is a society registered in 1978 under the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960.

3. As per the case of the respondent complainant on 30-9-2006, a letter in the form of complaint was addressed to the Officer-in-Charge, Ballygunge Police Station, Kolkata, by the General Manager, ISKCON, Kolkata, in which it was alleged inter alia that the International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON), Mumbai is a Society registered since 1971 under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 and the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950, having its registered office at Hare Krishna Land, Juhu, Mumbai-49. The said Society has many branches/offices all over India including one located at 3C, Albert Road, Kolkata-700019. The Governing Council of the said Society known as “Bureau” is the highest administrative body. The said Bureau at the relevant time had entrusted Shri Adridharan Das, who was the President of the said Kolkata Branch, with the management of the assets and properties situated at Kolkata Branch, which included a 42-seat deluxe bus of Ashok Leyland make, model Viking Alpsv 4/37-222 WB passenger bus, bearing registration No. WB 25A 0454, engine No. W