Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
AJAY RASTOGI, C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ.
Usha Chakraborty and Another – Appellants
Versus
State of West Bengal and Another – Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 256 of 2022, SLP (Crl.) 5866 of 2022
Decided On : 30-01-2023
(A) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Sections 482 and 156(3) – Exercise of inherent jurisdiction – Jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is to be exercised with care and caution and sparingly – Exercise of said power must be for securing ends of justice and only in cases where refusal to exercise that power may result in abuse of process of law – Section 482 is designed to achieve purpose of ensuring that criminal proceedings are not permitted to generate into weapons of harassment. (Paras 3 and 5.3)
(B) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 323, 384, 406, 423, 467, 468, 420 and 120B – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 482 – Hurt, extortion, criminal breach of trust, forgery, cheating and conspiracy – Quashing petition – In Counter affidavit respondent has virtually admitted pendency of suit filed against his removal from post of Secretary and trusteeship and its pendency – Factum of passing of adverse orders in interlocutory applications in Civil Suit as also prima facie finding and conclusion arrived at by Civil Court that respondent stands removed from post of Secretary and also from trusteeship are also not disputed therein – Since removal from office of Secretary and trusteeship was causative incident, he concealed pendency of civil suit to cover up civil nature of dispute – By non-disclosure respondent has concealed existence of a pending civil suit between him and appellants herein before a competent civil court which is causative incident for respondent’s allegation of perpetration of offences against appellants – In order to cause registration of an F.I.R. and consequential investigation based on same petition filed under Section 156(3), Cr.P.C., must satisfy essential ingredients to attract alleged offences – If such allegations in petition are vague and are not specific with respect to alleged offences it cannot lead to an order for registration of an F.I.R. and investigation on accusation of commission of offences alleged – Respondent had failed to make specific allegation against appellants herein in respect of offences – Dispute involved is essentially of civil nature – Appellants and respondents have given a cloak of criminal offence in the issue – Permitting continuance of criminal proceedings against appellants would result in abuse of process of Court and also in miscarriage of justice – FIR and criminal proceedings quashed and set aside. (Paras 9, 10, 11 and 12)
Facts of the case:
Present appeal by special leave is directed against the final judgment and order dated 17.05.2022 in C.R.R. No. 2615/2017 passed by Calcutta High Court at Calcutta. Appellants herein approached the High Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) seeking quashment of F.I.R. No. 189/2017 dated 11.04.2017, registered against them and two others, at Madhyamgram Police Station under Sections 323, 384, 406, 423, 467, 468, 420 and 120B of Indian Penal Code (I.P.C.) raising various grounds. High Court declined to exercise jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. holding that perusal of the case diary as also materials appearing therefrom prima facie made out a case for investigation. In that view of the matter, interim order granting stay of all further proceedings pursuant to the registration of the stated F.I.R. was vacated and the stated petition was dismissed.
Findings of Court:
Respondent has filed the pending title suit in the year 2015, he got no case that he obtained an interim relief against his removal from the office of Secretary of School Managing Committee as also the trusteeship, that he filed the stated application for an order for investigation only in April, 2017 together with absence of a case that despite such removal he got a right to get informed of the affairs of the school and also the trust, would only support the said conclusion.
Result : Appeal allowed.
You should assume that the case was primarily a civil matter that was being pursued through criminal proceedings. The court recognized that the core issues involved civil rights and remedies, and the criminal proceedings appeared to be a means to address civil disputes. Consequently, the court exercised its jurisdiction to quash the criminal FIR and proceedings to prevent misuse of the criminal process and ensure justice (!) .
JUDGMENT :
C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J.
Leave granted.
1. We have heard the learned counsel on both sides. This appeal by special leave is directed against the final judgment and order dated 17.05.2022 in C.R.R. No. 2615/2017 passed by the Calcutta High Court at Calcutta. The appellants herein approached the High Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) seeking quashment of F.I.R. No. 189/2017 dated 11.04.2017, registered against them and two others, at Madhyamgram Police Station under Sections 323, 384, 406, 423, 467, 468, 420 and 120B of Indian Penal Code (I.P.C.) raising various grounds. The High Court declined to exercise the jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. holding that perusal of the case diary as also the materials appearing therefrom prima facie made out a case for investigation. In that view of the matter, the interim order granting stay of all further proceedings pursuant to the registration of the stated F.I.R. was vacated and the stated petition was dismissed.
2. It is to be noted that the aforesaid crime was registered pursuant to the forwarding of an application filed by the respondent herein under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. raising the allegation against the persons named therein including the appellants, by the learned Magistrate for investigation and thereupon, investigation was commenced. The appellants herein assailed the very order for forwarding of the application for investigation under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. the consequential registration of the said F.I.R. and also the ongoing investigation pursuant thereto, raising various contentions that the application moved by the respondent herein before the learned Magistrate did not disclose commission of any cognizable offence, that the allegations in the complaint are actuated by mala-fides, that the allegations would reveal that they pertain to pure civil dispute between the parties and in fact the respondent did resort to civil remedies, that he failed in obtaining favourable order in interlocutory applications moved in a duly instituted suit and upon its frustration and as a tool for oppression and harassment he moved the application which culminated in the registration of the F.I.R. without disclosing the crucial aspects that in respect to the subject matter the suit instituted by him viz., Title Suit No. 363/2015 carrying the prayers for a declaration that he is the secretary of the schedule school and also for a permanent injunction restraining defendant Nos. 1 and 2 therein viz., the appellants herein, and their men, agents and associates from procuring and/or creating any document illegally and/or from obstructing him in representing as the Secretary of the Managing Committee, is pending before the First Court Civil Judge (Junior Division) at Barasat. It is also contended therein that the respondent herein had suppressed certain further aspects viz., that much before the filing of the application based on which the F.I.R. was registered he was removed from the post of Secretary and in fact, from the membership of the very Board of Trustees. Initially, he moved the office of Labour Commissioner raising grievances against such removal from the office of the secretary before instituting the stated suit. The impugned order would reveal that upon forming the opinion on perusal that they would prima facie make out a case for investigation, the High Court declined to exercise the jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. It would also reveal that the crucial and relevant contentions raised by the appellants were not at all considered by the High Court. Hence, necessarily, the question to be decided is whether the High Court was justified in declining to invoke the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the order dated 05.04.2017 for forwarding the application filed by the respondent herein carrying allegations qua the appellant for investigation under Section 156(3), Cr.P.C. the consequential registration of the F.I.R. and the investigatio
(1) Section 482 of Cr.P.C. is designed to achieve purpose of ensuring that criminal proceedings are not permitted to generate into weapons of harassment.(2) Civil disputes cannot be given cloak of cr....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the inherent power under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code should be sparingly used and only in exceptional cases to prevent abuse of....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for judicious exercise of powers under Section 156(3) of the CrPC, the duty of the police to register an FIR only if a cognizable o....
The power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is to be exercised sparingly and with circumspection, and the court must evaluate whether the ends of justice would justify the exercise of the inherent power.
The court emphasized that successive FIRs regarding the same incident are impermissible and quashed the FIR based on concealment of previous complaints and forum shopping, affirming the requirement o....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the abuse of process of law and the quashment of F.I.R. based on the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
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
