Back
1995 Supreme(All) 344
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
K. L. SHARMA
MOHD.HABIBUR RAHMAN FAIZI - Appellant
Versus
STATE - Respondents
CRI. MISC. APPLN. 14761 Of 1991
Decided On : 03/15/1995
A.N.SINGH, PRAKASH NARAYAN PANDEY, R.G.PADIYA, R.H.Zaidi
The High Court has inherent powers under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code to quash criminal proceedings and summoning orders that are false, frivolous, or vexatious.
Headnote:
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE - SECTION 482 - QUASHING OF CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS - COMPLAINT AND SUMMONING ORDER - FALSE AND FRIVOLOUS - INHERENT POWERS OF THE HIGH COURT - EXERCISE OF - GUIDELINES.
Fact of the Case:
The complainant, a former teacher at a minority educational institution, filed a complaint against the applicants, including the manager, principal, and members of the management committee, alleging misappropriation of government funds and criminal breach of trust. The applicants challenged the complaint and the summoning order issued by the magistrate, arguing that the allegations were false and frivolous and that there was no prima facie case against them.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the allegations in the complaint did not constitute any of the offenses alleged by the complainant. The court also found that the magistrate had not properly considered the evidence and had issued the summoning order in a mechanical manner. The court further found that the complainant had a personal grudge against the applicants and had filed the complaint with an ulterior motive to harass and spite them.
Issues: 1. Whether the complaint and the summoning order were false and frivolous. 2. Whether the magistrate had properly considered the evidence before issuing the summoning order. 3. Whether the complainant had an ulterior motive in filing the complaint.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the complaint and the summoning order were false and frivolous and that the magistrate had not properly considered the evidence before issuing the summoning order. The court also held that the complainant had an ulterior motive in filing the complaint. The court relied on several Supreme Court decisions to support its findings.
Final Decision: The court allowed the application and quashed the criminal proceedings and the summoning order. The court also directed the complainant to deposit Rs. 5000 as costs in the court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate.
( 1 ) THIS is an application under Section 482, Cr. P. C. for quashing the proceedings of a complaint case No. 352 of 1991, Mushtaq Ahmad v. Molvi Habibur Rahman and others pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mau under Sections 406, 402, 420, 467 and 468, I. P. C. and for quashing the summoning order dated 8-4-1991 under Section 406 and 409, I. P. C.
( 2 ) I have heard Sri R. H. Zaidi learned counsel for the applicants, Sri A. N. Singh and Sri R. C. Padia counsel for the opposite party No. 2 and the learned A. G. A. for the State and perused the material brought on record.
( 3 ) SINCE the counter affidavit and rejoinder affidavit have been exchanged between the parties, the following admitted facts emerge from the affidavits.
( 4 ) THERE is a minority educational institution known as Madrasa Faiz-e-Am at Maunath Bhajan in the district of Mau which imparts Arabic and Persian education to the students belonging to the minority community. The Madrasa receives grant-in-aid from the Government in the form of maintenance grant which is limited to the extent of the amount of salary of its teaching and non-teaching staff. The affairs of the Madrasa are being managed in accordance with the non statutory rules framed by the education department and run under the control of Inspector Arabic and Persian Madrasa U. P. The applicant No. 1 is the Manager, applicant No. 2 is the Principal applicant No. 3 is the teacher and the applicant No. 4 is the member of the committee of management of the Madrasa. The opposite party No. 2 Mushtaq Ahmad complainant was an assistant teacher in the Madrasa. On 1-8-1985, he applied for leave without pay for only a month, but, actually discharged his duties as teacher up to 18-8-1985 and drew salary up to that date but the management committee had granted leave without pay to him on 1-8-1985 itself. The opposite party No. 2 had applied for leave without pay on the ground that he was selected for higher studies by the King Saud University Saudi Arabia and actually he went to Saudi Arabia on leave without pay only for a month. One Sri Ishtiaq Ahmad was appointed in the vacancy caused by leave. Ishtiaq Ahmad joined and started teaching and drew salary of senior teacher. The opposite party No. 2 returned from Saudi Arabia in the year 1988. He filed the complaint in question against the applicants in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate Maunath Bhajan registered as Criminal Case No. 352 of 1991 on 20-3-1991.
( 5 ) ACCORDING to the case of the applicants, the opposite party No. 2 had returned from Saudi Arabia in Feb. 1988 and he was reappointed in the Madrasa with effect from 1-3-1988 but on 23-6-1988 he submitted his resignation by registered. post and his resignation was accepted. His salary was also paid with effect from 1-3-1988 to 30-6-1988. He made his complaint against the applicants to the Inspector Arabic and Persian Schools U. P. Allahabad on 5-5-1989 who conducted an inquiry and found all the allegations totally false. On 25-11-1989 the opposite party No. 2 sent a second complaint to thechief Minister and Education Minister of Uttar Pradesh Government which was inquired into by the District Basic Education Officer Mau and submitted report on 21-12-1990 stating that all the allegations made in the complaint were totally false. Another complaint was sent which was found false on inquiry by the AssistantDirector Basic Education VII Division Gorakhpur on 15-9-1989. The opposite party No. 2 also sent a report to the police station Kotwali, Mau which was investigated thoroughly and found false as reported by the 5. H. 0. Kotwali, Mau on 21-12-1989. He also endorsed copies of this report to the complaint Mustaq Ahmad and to the Inspector Arabic and Persian Schools U. P. and to the District Basic Education Officer. The applicants after getting fed up with the repeated complaints and inquiries filed a Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 30062 of 1991 (Committee of Management Madrasa F
