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

2023 Supreme(J&K) 241

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR
VINOD CHATTERJI KOUL, J.
Ghulam Mohammad Bhat and Ors. - Appellants
Versus
UT of J&K through P/S Behibagh and Anr. - Respondents
CRM(M) Nos. 401, 291 of 2022, C/w Bail App. No. 99 of 2022
Decided On : 20-10-2023

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Bilal Ahmad Malla.
For the Respondent: Mr. Mubeen Wani, Dy. AG, Mr. Bakhat Parvaiz.

The power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is to be exercised sparingly and with circumspection, and the court must evaluate whether the ends of justice would justify the exercise of the inherent power.

Headnote:

ABUSE OF PROCESS OF LAW - Criminal Offence - Section 147, 392, 341 IPC - The court discussed the scope of Section 482 Cr.P.C. and the exercise of inherent powers by the High Court to prevent abuse of the process of court. It highlighted the factors to determine the veracity of a prayer for quashing raised by an accused and emphasized that the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is to be exercised sparingly and with circumspection. The judgment also referred to the categories of cases where the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be exercised to prevent abuse of the process of the Court or secure ends of justice, as laid down by the Supreme Court in State of Haryana and others v. Bhajan Lal and others, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335. The court dismissed the petition as the FIR prima facie disclosed the commission of a cognizable offence.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners challenged the registration of FIR for the commission of offences under Section 147, 392, 341 IPC, arguing that a civil dispute had been given the color of a criminal act. They contended that the allegations in the FIR were wrong and false, and the registration of the FIR amounted to abuse of process of law.

Finding of the Court:

The court dismissed the petition as the FIR prima facie disclosed the commission of a cognizable offence, and therefore, it could not interfere with the registration of FIR or investigation of the case.

Issues: The main issue was whether the registration of FIR for the alleged criminal offences amounted to abuse of process of law, considering the nature of the dispute and the allegations made by the petitioners.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need to exercise inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. sparingly and with circumspection, and referred to the categories of cases where the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be exercised to prevent abuse of the process of the Court or secure ends of justice, as laid down by the Supreme Court in State of Haryana and others v. Bhajan Lal and others, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the petition as the FIR prima facie disclosed the commission of a cognizable offence.

JUDGMENT :

1. Petitioners are aggrieved of registration of FIR bearing No.8/2022, with Police Station Behibagh, Kulgam, for the commission of offence punishable under Section 147, 392, 341 IPC and challenge the same in this petition precisely on the ground that a civil dispute has been given the colour of criminal act, therefore, the registration of FIR in question amounts to abuse of process of law.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that while going through the complaint, it is clear that there had been commercial dealing between petitioner no.7 and respondent no.2, and it is because of such commercial dealings, FIR in question got registered and allegations in the same are wrong and false. Learned counsel for the petitioners has invited attention of this Court towards the contents of FIR to submit that the allegations contained in FIR are wrong.

3. Perusal of FIR reveals that the respondent no.2 had supplied wooden boxes as he is dealing with the trade of making and selling of wooden boxes. According to respondent no.2, on the fateful day, he was travelling in his own vehicle along with one Shiraz Ahmad Khan, who was driving the vehicle and on reaching Kathpora at Nadimarg crossing, their car was stopped by some persons, who started fighting with them. It is further mentioned in the FIR that they forcibly snatched the bag of respondent no.2, which contained account book and an amount of Rs.50,000/-. The respondent no.2 tried to save his bag, but the accused tore his bag into pieces and cash lying in it fell on the road and some of the accused collected the cash and some of them beat the duo ruthlessly. The respondent no.2 tried to save himself and was saved due to intervention of one Mohammad Ashraf Khan, who was by that time walking towards the spot. He alleges that they had narrow escape from the spot. The allegation of respondent no.2is that he was attacked by the petitioners on reaching at Kathipora Nadimurg and the allegations that the bag was snatched by them is a criminal act, which cannot be said to be a civil dispute. These allegations, however, may be correct or wrong, it is a matter of investigation and Investigating Officer has to investigate the truthfulness or otherwise of said allegations. Simply that the respondent no.2 had been dealing in making and selling of wooden boxes and having dealing with the accused, petitioner no.7, and that he was to pay money to him, does not make the allegations regarding wrongfulness assault and snatching of bag a civil dispute. It is clearly a criminal act, which is required to be investigated. The allegations contained in FIR disclosed prima facie commission of cognizable, for which FIR required to be registered. The police on such allegations registered FIR and started investigation. As such, no fault can be found with the registration of FIR of the case or starting of investigation. The registration of FIR or investigation in these allegations does not amount to abuse of process of law for which this Court could exercise jurisdiction under section 482 Cr.PC.

4. It would be appropriate to say that the scope of Section 482 Cr.P.C. is well defined and inherent powers could be exercised by the High Court to give effect to an order under the Code, to prevent abuse of the process of court; and to otherwise secure the ends of justice. This extraordinary power is to be exercised ex debito justitiae. However, in exercise of such powers, it is not permissible for the High Court to appreciate the evidence as it can only evaluate material documents on record to the extent of its prima facie satisfaction about existence of sufficient ground for proceedings against accused and the court cannot look into materials, acceptability of which is essentially a matter for trial.

5. The judicial conscience of the High Court should persuade it to quash such criminal proceedings in exercise of power vested in it under Section 482 Cr.P.C., if answer to all the steps, as enumerated herein aft

        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 telegram-icon
        whatsapp-icon Back to top