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

2024 Supreme(Ker) 548

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
A. BADHARUDEEN, J.
Jitha Sanjay W/o Sanjay – Petitioner
Versus
State of Kerala – Respondent
Crl. M.C. No. 2016 of 2023
Decided On : 18-06-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioners: C.K. Anwar, K.S. Sumeesh, Aswathi Vakkayil.
For the Respondent: Renjit George.

IMPORTANT POINT
The central legal point established in the judgment is that criminal proceedings can be quashed when manifestly attended with mala fide and maliciously instituted with ulterior motives.

Headnote:

ABUSE AND THREATENING - Criminal Trespass - Sections 143, 147, 447, 294(b), 506(i) and Section 149 of the IPC - The court discussed the legal provisions under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and referred to the decisions in Vineet Kumar and Others vs. State of U.P and Another, 2017 KHC 6274 : AIR 2017 SC 1884 : 2017 (13) SCC 369 and Mahmood Ali vs. State of U.P. 2023 KHC 7029 : 2023 KHC Online 7029 : 2023 Live Law (SC) 613 : 2023 KLT Online 175 : AIR 2023 SC 3709 : AIR Online 2023 SC 602 : 2023 Cri. L.J. 3896 to establish the legal framework for quashing criminal proceedings based on manifest mala fide and ulterior motives.

Fact of the Case:

The accused were alleged to have formed an unlawful assembly, criminally trespassed upon the complainant's property, and abused and threatened the complainant and her husband due to non-payment of a loan availed from a cooperative society.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the case was falsely implicated to nullify the demand for the loan amount and that the criminal proceedings were manifestly attended with mala fide and maliciously instituted with ulterior motives.

Issues: The issues revolved around the alleged offences of forming an unlawful assembly, criminal trespass, abuse, and threats, and the intention behind the criminal proceedings.

Ratio Decidendi: The court applied the legal principles established in the decisions of Vineet Kumar and Others vs. State of U.P and Another and Mahmood Ali vs. State of U.P. to quash the criminal proceedings based on manifest mala fide and ulterior motives.

Final Decision: The petition to quash the Annexure A9 Final Report and all further proceedings in C.C. No. 541/2019 was allowed, and the same was quashed.

ORDER :

1. This Criminal Miscellaneous Case has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to quash Annexure A9 Final Report and all further proceedings in C.C. No. 541/2019 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-III, Thrissur.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor. I have perused the relevant records.

3. In this matter, the prosecution case is that, the accused herein, formed into an unlawful assembly, with knowledge that they are all members of the said assembly, in prosecution of their common object and with intention to abuse and threaten the de facto complainant, due to animosity arose out of non-payment of loan availed by the husband of the de facto complainant from Citizens Co-operative Society, Thrissur District. Then, the accused criminally trespassed upon the courtyard of the house of the de facto complainant at 10.00 a.m. on 24.2.2019, abused the de facto complainant and threatened the de facto complainant and her husband, with dire consequences. This is the base on which, prosecution alleges commission of the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 447, 294(b), 506(i) and Section 149 of the IPC.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioners argued at length to convince this Court that, none of the offences alleged against the accused, are made out and therefore, the final report and further proceedings are liable to be quashed. It is pointed out that when the husband of the de facto complainant failed to repay an amount of Rs. 15 Lakh, availed by the husband of the de facto complainant from Citizens Cooperative Society, Thrissur District during 2016 and when the society officials demanded the same, in order to wreck vengeance against the said demand, this case is one foisted.

5. Whereas, the learned Public Prosecutor would submit that, under the guise of demand of the amount due from the husband of the de facto complainant, she was abused and threatened by accused Nos. 1 to 10 in this crime.

6. On perusal of the records, it could be gathered that there was loan arrears to be paid by the husband of the de facto complainant and the demand for the same and the subsequent events led to registration of this crime, alleging commission of the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 447, 294(b), 506(i) and Section 149 of the IPC.

7. Having considered the genesis of this case, as one arose out of demand of the loan arrears, at the instance of the husband of the de facto complainant, false implication to wreck vengeance on account of demand of the loan amount could be noticed.

8. In the decision in Vineet Kumar and Others vs. State of U.P and Another, 2017 KHC 6274 : AIR 2017 SC 1884 : 2017 (13) SCC 369, the Apex Court held in paragraph 39 that inherent power given to the High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is with the purpose and object of advancement of justice. In case solemn process of Court is sought to be abused by a person with some oblique motive, the Court has to thwart the attempt at the very threshold. The Court cannot permit a prosecution to go on if the case falls in one of the Categories as illustratively enumerated by this Court in State of Haryana vs. Bhajan Lal, AIR 1960 SC 866. Judicial process is a solemn proceeding which cannot be allowed to be converted into an instrument of operation or harassment. When there are material to indicate that a criminal proceeding which cannot be allowed to be converted into an instrument of operation or harassment. When there are material to indicate that a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive, the High Court will not hesitate in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the proceeding under Category 7 as enumerated in State of Haryana vs. Bhajan Lal (supra), which is to the following effect:

    “(7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala-fide and/or where the proce

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