Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
Amit Kumar Kejriwal @ Amit Kejriwal, S/o Late Ashok Kejriwal – Appellant
Versus
Union of India through C.B.I. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual basis for criminal proceedings against the petitioner. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments from both parties regarding the fir. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. court's reasoning against quashing the proceedings. (Para 6 , 8) |
| 4. law on the applicability of settling disputes in fraud cases. (Para 7) |
| 5. dismissal of the quashing petition. (Para 9) |
JUDGMENT :
SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, J.
1. Heard Mr. Indrajit Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner appearing through Video Conferencing and Mr. Prashant Pallav, learned counsel for the CBI.
2. This petition has been filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 praying therein for quashing the entire criminal proceeding arising out of First Information Report being Regular C.B.I. Case No.5 of 2025 (RC0242025A0006), dated 29.05.2025, registered for the offence punishable under Section 120 (B) read with Section 420 , 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 13 (2) read with 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, pending in the Court of the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-XVIII, Ranchi.
3. The prosecution case is that a written complaint vide PNB/RAN/CS/ SASTRA/2024-25 dated 21.02.2025 has b
Quashing of criminal proceedings is not permissible where serious fraud allegations threaten public interest; individual settlements cannot outweigh collective societal harm.
Settlement of monetary disputes does not automatically justify the quashing of criminal proceedings in cases involving serious allegations of criminality.
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....
The court reinforced that economic offences with societal implications should not be quashed based on civil settlements.
Serious economic offences, such as forgery and corruption, cannot be quashed based on private settlements due to their impact on society and public interest.
Redundant criminal proceedings should not be allowed to continue.
Quashing of FIRs for serious economic offences, such as forgery, cannot be justified by private settlements due to their implications on societal interests.
The court emphasized that economic offences involving the financial and economic well-being of the State have implications beyond private disputes, and the gravity of such offences must be considered....
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
