Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD
Kailash Kumar Agarwal @ Kailash Kumar Agrawal, s/o Late Jagdish Prasad – Appellant
Versus
Union of India through Central Bureau of Investigation – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, J.)
1. The instant criminal miscellaneous petition has been preferred for quashing of entire criminal proceedings in relation to the petitioner in connection with CBI, EOW, Ranchi case being F.I.R. No. RC0932014S0005 dated 02.05.2014 registered under Sections 120(B) r/w Sections 406/420/467/468 & 471 of the I.P.C. and subsequently Sections 13(2) r/w Section 13(1) (c) & (d) of P.C. Act were added in the charge sheet pending in the court of Learned Special Judge, C.B.I. Ranchi in R.C.05(S)/2014-EOW-R.
Further, petitioner has also prayed for quashing of order dated 25.09.2019 passed by learned Special Judge, C.B.I., Ranchi in R.C. 05 (S)/2014-EOW-R whereby and whereunder the discharge application filed by the petitioner has been rejected by the learned court.
Prayer has also been made for quashing of order dated 03.01.2020 passed by learned Special Judge, C.B.I., Ranchi in R.C.5(S)/2014-EOW-R whereby and whereunder charges have been framed against the petitioner u/s 120(B) r/w Sections 420/467 & 471 IPC and section 13(2) r/w section 13(1) (c) & (d) of Prevention of corruption Act.
Factual Matrix
2. The brief facts of the case as mentioned in the instant pet
The court held that mere negligence by an advocate in providing legal opinions does not constitute criminal conspiracy without evidence of active participation in the fraudulent scheme.
The court emphasized that mere suspicion is insufficient to establish a conspiracy, requiring credible evidence for proceeding against an accused.
The court confirmed that sufficient prima facie evidence exists to continue criminal proceedings for conspiracy and corruption, reinforcing the High Court's cautious exercise of inherent powers under....
A legitimate prosecution cannot be stifled under Section 482 Cr.P.C., and the complainant had locus standi to set the law in motion.
The court maintained that an FIR must not be quashed at an initial stage unless no prima facie case is established, even if the allegations suggest civil nature.
A legal professional cannot be criminally liable for merely providing a legal opinion on documents later found to be forged, without evidence of intentional participation in fraud or conspiracy.
Criminal conspiracy – Quash of Criminal Proceedings - Exercise of power vested in it under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. Such exercise of power, besides doing justice to accused, would save precious court t....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that at the stage of consideration of charge, an accused cannot rely on materials by way of defense, and the power under Section 482 of the Code 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
