IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that both civil and criminal proceedings can coexist, and quashing under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C is reserved for exceptional cases where proceedings are frivolous or malicious.

JUDGMENT :

BIBHAS RANJAN DE, J.

1. Quashing of the proceedings in connection with A.C. No. 1637 of 2017 pending before the Court of Ld. Judicial Magistrate, 5th Court, Alipore under Section 427/454/120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short IPC) has been sought for by the petitioners in connection with CRR No. 441 of 2018.

2. The prayer for speedy disposal of the said proceeding pending before the Ld. Judicial Magistrate, 5th Court, Alipore has been made by the petitioner in connection with CRR 4191 of 2017.

3. Both this revision applications are taken up together for disposal via this common judgment.

Brief facts:

4. On 02.09.2014 at about 1.30 p.m. the accused/petitioners (in connection with CRR 441 of 2018) entered through the main gate of the premises at Raja Rammohon Roy Road, Haridevpur, Kolkata-700041 and broke the padlock of the open car parking space owned by husband of the opposite party no. 2 (in connection with CRR 441 of 2018). On the basis of this event, an FIR being no. 447 of 2018 was lodged on 23.09.2014 to the Haridevpur Police Station where police submitted final report declaring the case as non-cognizable. Thereafter, Narazi petition was filed by the opposite party no. 2 on the basis of which further investigation was conducted. Again charge sheet was submitted by the investigating agency against the petitioner no. 2 (in connection with CRR 441 of 2018) under Section 427 of the IPC but again the opposite party no. 2 filed another Narazi petition with a prayer for further investigation by either CBI or CID. Then the case was converted into a complaint case vide order dated 23.02.2017 by Ld. Magistrate and after examination of the complainant and the available witnesses the Magistrate issued summon upon the accused under Sections 427/454/120B/34 of the IPC. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said order of the Ld. Magistrate, the accused/petitioners in connection with CRR 441 of 2018 preferred a revision application with a prayer for quashment of the proceedings.

Arguments Advanced:

With respect to CRR 441 of 2018:

5. Ld. Counsel, Mr. Sourav Chattejee, appearing on behalf of the petitioner in connection with CRR 441 of 2018 has mainly contended that the entire dispute arose out of an altercation regarding open space which is purely civil in nature and no criminal proceeding should be allowed to proceed further.

6. In support of his contention, Mr. Chatterjee has relied on a case of State of Haryana & others vs. Bhajanlal, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335, specifically relying on parameter 7 of the guidelines laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short Cr.P.C) which stands as follows:

“(7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge.”

7. Before parting with, Mr. Chatterjee has also highlighted some orders of the Court below wherein Ld. Judge has criticized the behavior of the Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party no. 2 in connection with CRR 441 of 2018 wherein Ld. Counsel virtually threatened the Court that he would not accept any order of further investigation unless the same is directed to be conducted by either Detective Department or CBI. This behavior of the Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of opposite party no. 2 clearly shows that they are hell bent to use the process of criminal law to harass the petitioners herein.

8. In order to substantiate his claim, Mr. Chatterjee has relied on some cases which stands as follows:

(i) Haji Iqbal alias Bala through S.P.O.A. vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. 2023 SCC Online SC 946

(ii) Haji Iqbal alias Bala through S.P.O.A. vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. 2023 SCC Online SC 948

(iii) State of Haryana & Ors. vs. Bhajan Lal & Ors. 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335

(iv) Vineet Kumar Goel vs. State of Ut