Back
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT SRINAGAR
Janak Raj Kotwal, J.
Rajeev Agarwal -Appellant
Versus
Manzoor Ahmad Naik & Ors. -Resopndent
561-A No. 239 of 2012 & IA(Cr.) No. 497 of 2012
Decided On : 25-07-2013
Inherent Powers - Quashing of Complaint - Code of Criminal Procedure - Sections 420 and 506 RPC - [Section 561-A, Code of Criminal Procedure] - [Sections 420 and 506, RPC] - The court discussed the inherent powers under Section 561-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the legal principles established in the case of State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, AIR 1992 SC 604. The court highlighted the categories of cases provided by the Supreme Court in Bhajan Lal's case, illustrating when the power to quash proceedings can be used to prevent abuse of process of the Court or to secure the ends of justice. The court emphasized the need for cautious and sparing exercise of inherent jurisdiction by the High Court.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought quashing of a complaint under Sections 420 and 506 RPC filed by respondent No. 1. The complaint alleged cheating and intimidation in a land transaction. The petitioner contended that the complaint was false and frivolous, managed by a witness to harass the petitioner and his family. The petitioner argued that the complaint caused miscarriage of justice and was an abuse of the court's process.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the complaint was inherently improbable and absurd, and the evidence provided was of a dubious nature. The court held that the case fell under the categories provided in the Bhajan Lal's case, illustrating when the power to quash proceedings can be used to prevent abuse of process of the Court or to secure the ends of justice. The court concluded that allowing the proceedings to continue would amount to abuse of the process of the Court and cause miscarriage of justice.
Issues: The issues involved the alleged false and frivolous nature of the complaint, the abuse of the court's process, and the inherent improbability and absurdity of the complaint and evidence.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the inherent powers under Section 561-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the legal principles established in the case of State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, AIR 1992 SC 604. The court applied the categories of cases provided in Bhajan Lal's case to determine whether the power to quash proceedings should be used to prevent abuse of process of the Court or to secure the ends of justice.
Final Decision: The court quashed the complaint filed by the complainant and the order dated 20. 9. 2012 passed by the ld. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Anantnag.
2. Heard. I have perused the record.
3. Briefly, the facts which are essential to dispose of this petition are these:
3.1 Petitioner-Rajiv Agarwal and proforma respondents are resident of a place falling in Tehsil and District Rewari (Haryana). They are the members of the same family. Respondent No. 1 (complainant) is a resident of Tehsil, Dhamhal Hangipora, District, Kulgam, Kashmir (J&K). The two witnesses, namely, Sanjay Sangam and Parveen Rao, whose initial statements have been recorded at the time of filing of complaint also, reside at Rewari, Harayana.
3.2 On 09.08.2012, petitioner lodges a report against PW-Parveen Rao at Police Station, Rewari City. On this report, offence under Sec. 506 was registered against him as FIR No. 253 of the said Police Station. In his report the petitioner inter alia alleges that the said Parveen Rao wants to grab 72 kanals of land owned by the petitioner about which his uncle, Puran Chand (respondent) is holding his power-of-attorney. A copy of the FIR is annexed with this petition. On 20.09.2012 respondent No. 1 files the complaint under Sections 420 and 506 RPC against the petitioner and the proforma respondents. In this complaint, above said Parveen Rao appears as one of the two witnesses, whose preliminary statements were recorded.
3.3 Case set out in the complaint, briefly, is that respondent No. 1 (complainant) had been visiting the State of Haryana in connection with his business. Accused persons met him in Harayana, he expressed his desire to purchase land in the said State and requested them to show him some land. Accused persons showed different lands to him and promised to sell him 25 kanals of land situated at Rewari for a consideration of Rs. 67,18,750/. Accused persons came to Kashmir on16.7.2007, met him in hotel `Four bhi' at Anantnag and received from him Rs. 14,00,000/ as first installment towards sale consideration of the said land. They again visited Anantnag on 23.03.2010 and obtained Rs. 18, 00,000/ more from him towards sale consideration of the said land. After that he demanded possession of the land from the accused, but they kept avoiding. He then came to know that accused have no authority qua the said land and they have cheated him of Rs. 32,00,000/. Accused persons kept avoiding him right from 23.3.2010. Finally they came to Anantnag on 17.09.2012. He asked them to return his money or transfer the land to him but they refused and tried to hit him with their private car. He had a narrow escape.
3.4. On presentation of the complaint on 20.09.2012, learned Chief Judicial Magistrate on the same day recorded initial statements of the complainant and two the witnesses, recorded his satisfaction that a prima facie case under Sections 420 and 506 RPC against the accused persons is made out and issued process against them.
4. Petitioner has sought quashing of the complaint and the order dated 20.09.2012 whereby process has been issued against him and the proforma respondents, mainly on the ground that the complaint is false and frivolous and has been managed by PW-Parveen Rao to harass the petitioners and his other family members. It is contended that allegations leveled in the complaint are absurd and inherently improbable inasmuch as the petitioner and the proforma respondents have never been to Kashmir valley. Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Anantnag has issued process in a routine manner without application of mind
AI
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
