SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2012 Supreme(Bom) 727

In the High Court of Bombay at Nagpur
A.P. BHANGALE
Ramesh s/o. Ramnarayan Chandak
Versus
State of Maharashtra
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO.474 OF 2011 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO.155 OF 2012
Decided on: 02-04-2012

Advocates Appeared:
For the Applicant:A.P. Tathod, Advocate.
For the Respondent:R1, J.B. Jaiswal, A.P.P, R2, Prashant Gode, R3 & R4, Raulkar, holding for G.G. Mishra, Advocates.

The pursuit of a civil remedy does not preclude the continuation of criminal proceedings if there are sufficient grounds to proceed further.

Headnote:

Criminal Proceedings - Civil Suit - The court held that there is no bar in law for any party to take recourse to both the civil and the criminal proceedings simultaneously. Civil and criminal proceedings are distinct from each other, and the pursuit of civil remedy does not preclude the continuation of criminal proceedings if there are sufficient grounds to proceed further. The court emphasized that prosecution can continue notwithstanding the pendency of a civil suit if the allegations constitute a cognizable offense prima facie.

Fact of the Case:

The applicants challenged the order issuing process against them for offenses under the Indian Penal Code, as they were also involved in a civil suit for the same matter.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the pursuit of a civil remedy does not preclude the continuation of criminal proceedings if there are sufficient grounds to proceed further, and there is no legal bar for filing criminal proceedings merely because a civil suit is pending. The court dismissed the applications challenging the order.

Issues: Legality of order issuing process in criminal proceedings while a civil suit is pending.

Ratio Decidendi: The pursuit of a civil remedy does not preclude the continuation of criminal proceedings if there are sufficient grounds to proceed further.

Final Decision: The applications challenging the order were dismissed.

Judgment

The applicants in both these applications have questioned the legality, propriety and correctness of the order dated 11.7.2011 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Karanja (Lad) in Regular Criminal Case No.81/2010 issuing process against the applicants for the offences punishable under Section 120-B, 406, 420, 423, 465, 471 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

3. It is not disputed that the complainant, her sisters and mother have filed Special Civil Suit No.14/2010 before the Civil Judge, Senior Division for cancellation of Sale Deed obtained by the applicants for a consideration of Rs.2,70,000/-. In the agreement which was allegedly signed by the parties before the notary, consideration for the land was shown at Rs.7,50,000/-, whereas consideration in the Sale Deed is reflected at Rs.2,70,000/-. Civil suit is still pending. It is the contention of the complainant that the transaction was in fact for Rs.44,56,250/-. It is alleged that the complainant and her family members were thus cheated by the applicants.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that when the civil remedy is taken recourse to by the complainant and others, the learned Magistrate should not have entertained the present complaint and issued the process. There is no bar in law for any party to take recourse to both the civil and the criminal proceedings simultaneously. Civil and criminal proceedings are distinct from each other and what is achieved by the civil remedy, may not be achieved through the criminal proceeding and vice versa. Criminal proceedings can continue if there is sufficient ground to proceed further. The argument that once the civil remedy is chosen, remedy in criminal law is not available to the complainant, is without merit. Prosecution can continue notwithstanding pendency of civil suit if allegations constitute cognizable offence, prima facie. There is no express legal bar for filing criminal proceeding merely because civil suit is pending. Learned Magistrate on perusal of the complaint, police report submitted under Section 202 of the Criminal Procedure Code and verification statement of the complainant has issued the process for the aforesaid offences. No interference is called for in the impugned order. Both the applications are accordingly dismissed.


Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top