SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
Usha Martin Limited, West Bengal – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
The judgment underscores the crucial requirement of establishing dishonest intention and fraudulent inducement to prove the offences of cheating and criminal breach of trust. It emphasizes that for such criminal offences to be made out, there must be clear evidence of deception and a wrongful intention at the inception of the transaction, rather than a subsequent development of such intent. The court highlights the importance of scrutinizing the veracity of the allegations and cautions against misusing criminal proceedings to convert civil disputes into criminal cases, which constitutes an abuse of the court's process (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) .
Furthermore, the judgment clarifies that disputes arising out of contractual agreements, especially when they involve civil rights and obligations, should primarily be addressed through civil remedies. The initiation of criminal proceedings in such contexts, without clear evidence of criminal intent or misconduct, can amount to an abuse of process and may be quashed to prevent harassment and uphold the principles of justice (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) .
The court also emphasizes the importance of the inherent powers of the courts to prevent misuse of the legal process. It states that criminal proceedings should not be allowed to continue if they are primarily based on civil disputes, especially when the allegations do not prima facie disclose a criminal offence or involve mala fide motives. The exercise of these inherent powers is intended to prevent harassment and to ensure that justice is not subverted by malicious or frivolous criminal cases (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) .
In conclusion, the judgment reinforces that criminal proceedings should be initiated and continued only when there is substantive evidence of criminal intent and conduct. When a dispute is essentially civil in nature, and the criminal allegations are based on civil rights violations, courts have the authority to quash such proceedings to prevent abuse of process and to promote justice (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) .
JUDGMENT :
In both the cases common question of facts and law are involved that is why both the petitions are being heard together with the consent of the parties.
2. Heard Mr. Kaushik Sarkhel and Mr. Indrajit Sinha, learned counsels for the petitioners, Mr. Ashutosh Anand and Mrs. Priya Shrestha learned counsel for the State and Mr. Mahesh Tewari, learned counsel for the O.P. No. 2.
3. These criminal miscellaneous petitions have been filed for quashing of entire criminal proceeding in connection with Gamharia P.S. Case No. 13 of 2022 as well as order dated 21.01.2022 whereby the learned C.J.M., Saraikella has been pleased to transmit the C.C. No. 40/2022 under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. for institution of F.I.R., pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saraikella.
4. The complaint was filed alleging therein that complainant is one of the partners of M/s Sai Metaliks Ltd., a business firm having its head office at quarter no. 1161, sector 12 F, Bokaro Steel City, Bokaro, and the factory situated in plot nos. 132, 145, 127, 126, 125, Khata No. 9, in mouza Reghadih, P.O. and P.S. Gamharia, District Saraikella-Kharsawan, Jharkhand-832108. The other partners of the complaina
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.