Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JODHPUR
MADAN GOPAL VYAS, J.
Pradeep Kumar Agarwal S/o Shri Prem Kumar Agarwal – Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
S.B. Criminal Misc. (Pet.) No. 3025 of 2020
Decided On : 05-05-2023
Special Operation Group - Criminal Proceedings - 482 naM ÁfØ;k lafgrk - The court discussed the legal provisions of Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code and its application in quashing criminal proceedings. The court emphasized that the power under Section 482 should be exercised sparingly and with caution, and should not be used to stifle a legitimate prosecution. The judgment also highlighted the need for a full-fledged trial to determine the validity of allegations and the importance of not interfering with the investigation and trial of criminal cases unless there is no disclosure of any offense or the prosecution is barred by law.
Fact of the Case:
The judgment discussed the application of Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code in quashing criminal proceedings and emphasized the need for a full-fledged trial to determine the validity of allegations.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the power under Section 482 should be exercised sparingly and with caution, and should not be used to stifle a legitimate prosecution. It also emphasized the importance of not interfering with the investigation and trial of criminal cases unless there is no disclosure of any offense or the prosecution is barred by law.
Issues: The issues revolved around the application of Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code and the need for a full-fledged trial to determine the validity of allegations.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision emphasized the need for caution in exercising the power under Section 482, highlighting that it should not be used to stifle a legitimate prosecution and should not interfere with the investigation and trial of criminal cases unless there is no disclosure of any offense or the prosecution is barred by law.
Final Decision: The court decided that the power under Section 482 should be exercised sparingly and with caution, and should not be used to stifle a legitimate prosecution. It also emphasized the importance of not interfering with the investigation and trial of criminal cases unless there is no disclosure of any offense or the prosecution is barred by law.
JUDGMENT :
MADAN GOPAL VYAS, J.
1- ;kphx.k dh vksj ls /kkjk 482 naM ÁfØ;k lafgrk ds rgr ;g f}rh; fofo/k nkafMd ;kfpdk iqfyl Fkkuk tokgj uxj] ftyk Jhxaxkuxj esa ntZ ÁFke lwpuk fjiksVZ la[;k 631@2019 dks fujLr djus gsrq ÁLrqr dh xbZ gSA
2- eSaus i{kdkjku ds ;ksX; vf/koDrkx.k o ;ksX; yksd vfHk;kstd dh cgl lquh o vfHkys[k dk voyksdu fd;kA
3- ;ksX; vf/koDrk ;kphx.k us ;g rdZ fn;k fd ÁFke lwpuk fjiksVZ ds vuqlkj ?kVuk fnukad 25-09-2019 ls 15-10-2019 ds e/; dh gSA ifjoknh dk ifjokn fnukad 22-12-2019 dks ÁkIr gqvk] ftlds vk/kkj ij mlh fnu ÁFke lwpuk fjiksVZ iathc) dh xbZ] ysfdu mlls iwoZ gh i{kdkjksa ds e/; ;kfpdk ds iSjk la[;k 03 esa of.kZr ek/;LFke~ ,oa lqyg vf/kfu;e] 1996 o nhokuh nkoksa ds djhc 17 Ádj.k ÁkjaHk gks x, FksA i=koyh ds i`”B la[;k 58 ij INSTRUCTIONS/CHECK LIST FOR FILLING KYC FORM (For Trading and Demat Account) ds Important Points vafdr gSa vkSj i`”B la[;k 59 ij Dispute Resolution ds vuqlkj fdlh Ádkj dk fookn mRiUu gksus ij Ádj.k e/;LFk ds le{k ÁLrqr djus dk Áko/kku gSA i{kdkjksa ds e/; fookn mRiUu gksus ij ek/;LFke~ ,oa lqyg vf/kfu;e] 1996 ds rgr e/;LFkrk dh dk;Zokgh gqbZ vkSj e/;LFk ds vokWMZ dks okf.kfT;d U;k;ky;] chdkusj esa pqukSrh nh gqbZ gSA ifjoknh i{k us flfoy U;k;k/kh'k] Jhxaxkuxj ds U;k;ky; esa Hkh migkj&i= dks fujLr djus gsrq nhokuh nkok ÁLrqr fd;k gSA e/;LFk dh dk;Zokgh gLrxr ÁFke lwpuk fjiksVZ iathc) gksus ls iwoZ gh ÁkjaHk gks xbZ FkhA ÁFke lwpuk fjiksVZ esa Hkh laifÙk;ka varfjr djus dk mYys[k gS] ysfdu fdlh O;fDr }kjk viuh laifRr dks varfjr djuk dksbZ vijk/k ugha gksrk gSA ifjoknh ds lkFk lu~ 2012 ls ;kphx.k dk okf.kfT;d laO;ogkj gSA i{kdkjksa ds e/; nhokuh Ád`fr dk fookn gSA ifjoknh dks tks Hkh gkfu gqbZ gS] mlds fy, vkijkf/kd Ádj.k iathc) ugha gks ldrk gSA nhokuh fookn ds fy, nhokuh dkuwu ds rgr ifjoknh dks mipkj miyC/k gS vkSj ifjoknh us /kkjk 9 ek/;LFke~ ,oa lqyg vf/kfu;e] 1996 ds rgr ÁkFkZuk i= ,oa nhokuh nkos Hkh ÁLrqr fd, gq, gSa] ,slh fLFkfr esa ÁFke lwpuk fjiksVZ ntZ djokuk dkuwu dk nq#i;ksx gSA ;ksX; vf/koDrk ;kphx.k us ;g Hkh rdZ fn;k fd Lower Circuit ls ;kphx.k dks djhc 11 djksM+ #i;s dk uqdlku gqvk gSA ;kphx.k dks ifjoknh ds dkj.k uqdlku gqvk gSA i{kdkjksa ds e/; djhc 54 Ádj.k fofHkUu Ád`fr ds] fofHkUu U;k;ky;ksa esa yafcr gSA vUos”k.k] ,lvksth dks lqiqnZ fd;k gqvk gSA ,lvksth us vfu;ferrk,a cjrh gSa] blfy, gLrxr f}rh; nkafMd fofo/k ;kfpdk iks”k.kh; gSA NCDEX dk Lower Circuit yxuk ;kphx.k ds fu;a=.k esa ugha gSA /kkjk 415 Hkkjrh; naM lafgrk esa of.kZr Ny ds dksbZ rRo fo|eku ugha gS vkSj u gh ,sls fdlh rRo dk mYys[k ÁFke lwpuk fjiksVZ esa gS] blfy, dksbZ vijk/k ugha curk gSA NCDEX us ifjoknh ds #i;s dkVs] ftlds fy, ;kphx.k mRrjnk;h ugha gSA var esa fuosnu fd;k fd ;kphx.k dh ;kfpdk Lohdkj dj ÁFke lwpuk fjiksVZ la[;k 631@2019] iqfyl Fkkuk tokgj uxj] Jhxaxkuxj dks vikLr fd;k tkosA mUgksaus vius bu rdksZ dh iqf”V esa fuEufyf[kr uthjsa is'k dh] ftudk eSaus voyksdu fd;k%&
2. Bonanza Commodities Brokers Pvt. Ltd. vs. Mrs. Roshanara Bhinder, Arbitration Petition No. 195 of 2015, Bombay High Court, Pronounced on 16th April, 2015
3. Wyeth Limited and Others vs. State of Bihar and Another, 2022 Live Law (SC) 721
4. Sarabjit Kaur vs. State of Punjab and Another, 2023 Live Law (SC) 157
5. Prof. R.K. Vijayasarathy and Another vs. Sudha Seetharam and Another, (2019) 16 SCC 739
6. Paramjeet Batra vs. State of Uttarakhand and Others, (2013) 11 SCC 673
7. Harshendra Kumar vs. Rebatilata Koley and Others, (2011) 3 SCC 351
8. Vinod Kumar, IAS vs. Union of India and Others, Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 255/2021, Supreme Court of India, Order dated 29-06-2021
9. Superintendent and Remembrancer of Legal Affairs, West Bengal vs. Mohan Singh and Others, (1975) 3 SCC 706
4- ;ksX; vf/koDrk ÁR;FkhZ la[;k 02 us ;g rdZ fn;k fd ifjoknh NCDEX dk czksdj gS vkSj ;kphx.k ifjoknh ds xzkgd gSaA lu~ 2012 esa ;kph Ánhi dqekj us ÁFke ckj [kkrk [kqyok;k FkkA rRi'pkr~ lu~ 2019 rd Áse dqekj] js[kk jkuh] deyk
The central legal point established in the judgment is the need for caution in exercising the power under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code and the importance of not interfering with the inv....
The court emphasized that successive petitions under Section 482 CrPC should not be allowed to prevent abuse of process, ensuring fair investigation procedures.
Points of law : Powers possessed by the High Court under Section 482 of the Code are very wide and the very plenitude of the power requires great caution in its exercise. Court must be careful to see....
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.
Quashing – High Court has inherent power to quash criminal proceedings even in those cases which are not compoundable, but such power is to be exercised sparingly and with great caution.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the inherent power under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code should be sparingly used and only in exceptional cases to prevent abuse of....
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
