Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
HARISH KUMAR
Rakesh Srivastava @ Rakesh Kumar Srivastava, Son of Abhay Narayan Srivastava @ Abhay Narayan Prasad – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(HARISH KUMAR, J.)
This Court has heard Ms. Kumkum Mukherjee, along with Mr. Rajeev Ranjan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Vishwanath Prasad Singh, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Ms. Soni Shrivastava, learned Advocate for the Economic Offence Unit. Learned APP for the State is also present.
2. The petitioner by invoking the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashing of the First Information Report, bearing Economic Offence Wings Case No.12 of 2015 dated 26.11.2015 (G.R. Case No. 5719 of 2015) instituted for the offences punishable under Sections 420 , 406 and 120B of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , presently pending with the Learned Special Court, Economic Offence Wings, Muzaffarpur.
3. The prosecution case as briefly stated in the F.I.R. that on 11.12.2014 one Md. Kaisar Jamal gave a written application to the Inspector General, Economic Offences Unit, Bihar, Patna alleging therein that Sarada Pleasure and Adventure Limited is a Company (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Company’) and its headquarter is at Siliguri (West Bengal), the branches of which runs at Jandaha (Vaishali), Patna, Chapara, Muzaffarp
A legitimate prosecution should not be stifled by the inherent power under Section 482; delays must be evaluated in context and cannot independently quash serious allegations.
The absence of established intention to cheat from the beginning and the need to make the company a party in cases where a wrong has been done by the company are crucial legal principles established ....
Delay in criminal proceedings may constitute an infringement of the right to a speedy trial under Article 21, warranting quashing of charges if allegations do not establish a prima facie case.
Criminal proceedings can be quashed when based on unsubstantiated allegations, especially in cases of inordinate delay in the investigation, which infringes on the right to a speedy trial.
The court emphasized that the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. should be sparingly exercised and that the court should not interfere with the investigation unless no cognizable offence is disclosed. I....
(1) Economic offences stand on a different footing than other offences and have wider ramifications – They constitute a class apart.(2) Power conferred by Section 482., Cr.P.C. is expected to be used....
The court established that the inherent power to quash FIRs under Section 482 Cr.P.C. should be exercised cautiously and only in rare cases where no cognizable offence is disclosed.
It surprises us in the extreme that the High Court thought that in the exercise of its inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, it could quash a first information report. ....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
