IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J.
Safdar Raja Khan – Appellant
Versus
State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. And Another – Respondents
Application U/S 482 No.6302 of 2023
Decided on : 05-07-2023
Section 482 Cr.P.C. - Quashing of charge sheet and summoning order - Sections 147, 336, 504 & 506 IPC - 147, 336, 504, 506 - The court discussed the principles for exercise of discretionary powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, and subsequent interpretations in Google India (P) Ltd. v. Visaka Industries, (2020) 4 SCC 162, N. Soundaram v. P.K. Pounraj, (2014) 10 SCC 616, Kaptan Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others; (2021) 9 SCC 35, SUO MOTO WRIT (CRL) No. (S) 1 of 2017 In RE: To issue certain guidelines regarding inadequacies and deficiencies in criminal trials vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors. vide its judgment and order dated 20.04.2021, and Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another; (2021) 10 SCC 773. The court emphasized that the power of quashing a criminal proceeding should be exercised sparingly and with circumspection, and that the extraordinary or inherent powers do not confer an arbitrary jurisdiction on the court to act according to its whim or caprice.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant sought quashing of the charge sheet and summoning order in a criminal case, claiming false implication.
Finding of the Court:
The court discussed the principles for exercise of discretionary powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and emphasized that the power of quashing a criminal proceeding should be exercised sparingly and with circumspection.
Issues: The main issue was whether the court should quash the criminal proceedings based on the applicant's claim of false implication.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the power of quashing a criminal proceeding should be exercised sparingly and with circumspection, and that the extraordinary or inherent powers do not confer an arbitrary jurisdiction on the court to act according to its whim or caprice.
Final Decision: The application was disposed of, allowing the applicant to surrender and move an application for bail, to be considered expeditiously by the court below.
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Mr. Ramakar Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
2. By means of the present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. the applicant has sought for quashing of the impugned charge sheet dated 06.03.1999 and summoning order dated 16.03.1999 in Case Crime No.681F/1994, under Sections 147, 336, 504 & 506 IPC registered at Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Sultanpur including the entire criminal proceedings pending before the Court of learned Special Judge, MP/MLA Court, Sultanpur, on the ground that the applicant has been implicated falsely.
3. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the aforesaid prayer and has submitted that while exercising the jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C., this Court cannot go into the correctness of the allegations made against the applicant and has only to examine whether on the basis of the allegations made and material collected during investigation, the offences are made out against the applicant or not.
4. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426 has laid down certain guidelines for exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. in the following words:
a.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.
a.2 Where the allegations in the first information report and other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR 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.
a.3 Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused.
a.4 Where, the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under Section 155(2) of the Code.
a.5 Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused.
a.6 Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the Act concerned (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code or the Act concerned, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party.
a.7 Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge."
5. After laying down the principles for exercise of the discretionary powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. in Bhajan Lal (supra), the Hon'b
Dineshbhai Chandubhai Patel vs. State of Gujrat; (2018) 3 SCC 104
Google India (P) Ltd. v. Visaka Industries
Jeffrey J. Diermeier v. State of W.B.
Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.; 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC)
Kaptan Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others; (2021) 9 SCC 35
MCD v. Ram Kishan Rohtagi (1983) 1 SCC 1
Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another; (2021) 10 SCC 773
The power of quashing a criminal proceeding should be exercised sparingly and with circumspection, and the extraordinary or inherent powers do not confer an arbitrary jurisdiction on the court to act....
The power to quash a criminal proceeding under Section 482 Cr.P.C should be exercised sparingly and cautiously to prevent the abuse of process of any court and to secure the ends of justice.
The power of quashing a criminal proceeding should be exercised very sparingly and with circumspection, and only in the rarest of rare cases.
Courts should exercise quashing powers sparingly and allow reasonable time for investigation before considering quashing criminal proceedings.
The main legal principle established in the judgment is that the inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. should be exercised sparingly and with circumspection, and only in cases where allowing the p....
Anticipatory bail can be granted even after a charge-sheet is filed, and inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be invoked to prevent abuse of process and secure justice.
The power to quash a criminal proceeding should be exercised sparingly and cautiously to prevent abuse of process of any court and to secure the ends of justice.
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.