IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Coram
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice MansoorAhmad Mir, Acting Chief Justice
CrMMONo. 6of 2014 Reserved on: 07.04.20 14 Decided on: 25.04.2014
H.P.Cricket Association & another Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & others
The Himachal Pradesh High Court declined to quash an FIR and the subsequent investigation into allegations of criminal breach of trust, cheating, and other offenses involving the Himachal Pradesh Cricket Association (HPCA) and various individuals, including petitioner Anurag Thakur. The Court held that the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) should be exercised sparingly and only in exceptional circumstances to prevent abuse of process or secure the ends of justice.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners, including the HPCA and Anurag Thakur, sought to quash the FIR and investigation, arguing that the allegations were baseless, politically motivated, and an attempt to harass them. They claimed that the dispute was a civil matter and that no criminal offense had been committed. The petitioners also contended that the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act (PC Act) were not applicable as the alleged offenders were not public servants.
Finding of the Court:
The Court examined the scope and limitations of its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC, emphasizing that such powers should be exercised cautiously and only in rare cases. The Court noted that the allegations in the FIR, if true, would constitute cognizable offenses and that the investigating agency had collected evidence indicating the involvement of multiple individuals, including public servants, in the alleged criminal activities.
Issues: 1. Whether the allegations against the petitioners disclosed cognizable offenses? 2. Whether the provisions of the PC Act were applicable to the alleged offenders? 3. Whether the FIR and investigation should be quashed due to mala fides or political vendetta?
Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that the allegations in the FIR, if proven, would constitute offenses punishable under various provisions of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the PC Act. The Court rejected the argument that the dispute was purely civil in nature, noting that the alleged acts of criminal breach of trust, cheating, and misuse of official positions had wider implications and could not be dismissed as mere civil wrongs.
Final Decision: The Court dismissed the petition, holding that the petitioners had failed to establish a case for interference under Section 482 CrPC. The Court found that the allegations were not patently absurd or inherently improbable, that there was no legal bar to the initiation or continuation of the criminal proceedings, and that the ends of justice would not be served by quashing the FIR and investigation.
Mansoor Ahmad Mir, Acting Chief Justice By the medium of this petition, the petitioners have invoked the jurisdiction of this Court in terms of Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as “CrPC”) for quashing FIR No. 12 of 2013, dated 1st August, 2013, registered at Police Station Dharamshala, under Sections 406, 420, 120B of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as “IPC”) and Section 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as “PC Act”), on the grounds taken in the memo of petition.
2. This petition came up for consideration before one of the Coordinate Benches of this Court on 7th January, 2014 and was deferred with the observation that the case be listed before another Bench subject to the orders of the Chief Justice. Thereafter, the petition came up for consideration before another Bench on 9th January, 2014 and was adjourned with liberty to make a mention before the learned Vacation Judge. On 24th January, 2014, the learned Vacation Judge asked the petitioners to seek appropriate orders from the Chief Justice qua listing being the pending matter. It appears that this order was questioned by the petitioners before the Apex Court and the Apex Court, after hearing the parties, passed the following order:
“The substance of the matters is that an application filed by the petitioners herein under Section 482 CrPC could not be heard by the High Court of Himachal Pradesh for various reasons including that two of the Hon ‘ble Judges declined to hear the matter. Therefore, there is a prayer in T.P. (Crl.) No. 42 of 2014 to transfer the Cr.MMO No. 6/2014 titled as “Himachal Pradesh Cricket Association & Anr. Vs. State ofHimachal Pradesh before the High Court of Himachal Pradesh. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, we deem it appropriate to request the Hon’ble Chief Justice of the High Court of Himachal Pradesh to take up the Cr.MMO No. 6/2014 himself and dispose of the same expeditiously. The parties are at liberty to mention the matter before the Hon’ble the Chief Justice of the High Court. In view of the above observations, the special leave petition and transfer petition stands disposed of. In view of the disposal of the special leave petition and transfer petition, no order is required to be passed by this court in I.A. No. 3971 /2014 in T.P. (Crl.) No. 42 of 2014 and CrlMPNo. 393 7/2014 in SLP (Crl.) No. 963/2014.”
3.In terms of the orders of the Apex Court, after hearing the parties, I was asked to hear the petition and no relief was granted in miscellaneous petitions. The matter came up before this Court on 4th March, 2014, the matter was partly heard with a direction to the respondents to file latest status of investigation, which was filed by the learned Advocate General. The matter was heard on 7th April, 2014, and was reserved for judgment.
4.The petitioners have questioned the lodging of FIR on the following grounds:
1.That it is purely a civil dispute outcome of civil liability and civil suit is pending in this Court.
2.That the petitioners have not violated any law, the leases were executed by the State in favour of the petitioners and the State is still the owner. And if the petitioners have acted in violation of the terms and conditions of the lease, that may be ground for cancellation of the lease(s) and not for lodging an FIR subjecting the petitioners and other persons to investigation and to face criminal trial.
3.That no mens rea is involved, thus, no criminal case is made out.
4.That the Cricket Association was ‘a not for profit society’ and was not converted into company with ulterior motives. Thus, thequestion of wrongful loss or wrongful gain does not arise at all.
5.That the entire case is politically motivated, based on Congress charge sheet, the investigation is monitored by the Chief Ministerrespondent No. 2 and Special Investigation Team has been asked to submit the report to the Chief Ministerresponden
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.