The power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash proceedings is an exception and should be exercised sparingly.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, to call for the records relating to the charge sheet filed in C.C.No.829 of 2022 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Virudhunagar and quash the same.)

1. This Criminal Original Petition has been filed, invoking Section 482 Cr.P.C., seeking orders to call for the records relating to the charge sheet filed in C.C.No.829 of 2022 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Virudhunagar and quash the same.

2. The petitioner is the sixth accused in C.C.No.829 of 2022 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.II, Virudhunagar.

3. The case of the prosecution is that the father of the petitioner served as Head Clerk and misappropriated a sum of Rs.28.10 Lakhs, which was meant for compensation awarded to the victim of the road accident as well as the legal heirs of the deceased persons and the same was transferred to the account of the petitioner herein.

4. On the basis of the complaint lodged by the second respondent, FIR came to be registered in Crime No.21 of 2021 against the petitioner for the alleged offences under Sections 120(B), 408, 420 IPC. After investigation the respondent police filed a final report and the same was taken coginzance in C.C.No.829 of 2022.

5. The main contention of the petitioner is that the petitioner was not having any knowledge about the nature of the amount. It is the specific charge against the petitioner that MCOP amount available in the Court deposit was transferred by the first accused, who is the father of the petitioner, to the petitioner''s account and thereafter, withdrawn the amount through cheque.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioner has raised grounds that there are lot of contradictions in the FIR as well as in the final report, that there was no specific allegations made against the petitioner and that the petitioner is no way connected to the crime alleged by the defacto complainant. As rightly contended by the learned Government Advocate(Crl.side), these aspects cannot be gone into now and the same are matter for trial.

7. The Hon''ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Haryana and others Vs. Bhajan Lal and others reported in 1992 SCC (Cri) 426 has enumerated 7 categories of cases, where the power can be exercised under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure and the same are extracted hereunder:-

 “102. In the backdrop of the interpretation of the various relevant provisions of the Code under Chapter XIV and of the principles of law enunciated by this Court in a series of decisions relating to the exercise of the extraordinary power under Article 226 or the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code which we have extracted and reproduced above, we give the following categories of cases by way of illustration wherein such power could be exercised either to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice, though it may not be possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined and sufficiently channelised and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such power should be exercised.

(1) where the allegations made in the First Information Report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused;

(2) where the allegations in the First Information Report and other materials, if any, accompanying the F.I.R. do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code;

(3) where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or ''complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the comm