9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2008 (8) TMI 880 - SC - Indian LawsWhether the case of the appellants comes under any of the categories enumerated in Bhajan Lal (1990 (11) TMI 386 - SUPREME COURT)? Is it a case where the allegations made in the first information report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in entirety, do not make out a case against the accused under Sections 420, 467 and 120B IPC?
Issues Involved:
1. Whether the complaint under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and Sections 447, 427, 506 of the Indian Penal Code was valid. 2. Whether the High Court should have exercised its jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the complaint. Issue-wise Detailed Analysis: 1. Validity of the Complaint under Section 3(1)(x) of the SC/ST Act and Sections 447, 427, 506 of IPC: The appellant contended that even if the allegations in the complaint were taken as true, no offense was made out under Section 3(1)(x) of the SC/ST Act or Sections 447, 427, and 506 of the IPC. Section 3(1)(x) of the SC/ST Act requires that the accused must not be a member of a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe and must have intentionally insulted or intimidated the complainant with the intent to humiliate in a place within public view. The complaint did not mention that the accused was not a member of a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe, nor did it state that the insult or intimidation occurred in a place within public view. Thus, the basic ingredients of the offense were missing, making the complaint under Section 3(1)(x) of the Act unsustainable. Similarly, the ingredients of Section 506 of the IPC, which pertains to criminal intimidation, were absent in the complaint. The complaint did not mention that the accused had intimidated or threatened the complainant or anyone else. Therefore, no case under Section 506 IPC could be sustained. The allegations under Sections 447 and 427 IPC were also found to be baseless, as the respondent was not in possession of the disputed property at the time of the alleged incident, making the charges of trespass and mischief unsustainable. 2. Exercise of Jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C.: The High Court has inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to act ex debito justitiae to do real and substantial justice or to prevent abuse of the process of the court. These powers can be exercised to: (i) give effect to an order under the Code, (ii) prevent abuse of the process of court, and (iii) secure the ends of justice. The Supreme Court has consistently held that these powers should be exercised sparingly and with great caution. In the present case, the High Court should have exercised its jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the complaint, as the continuation of the criminal proceedings would have been an abuse of the process of law. Discussion of Decided Cases: The judgment referenced several landmark cases to elucidate the scope and ambit of Section 482 Cr.P.C.: - In R.P. Kapur v. State of Punjab, the Court summarized categories where inherent power should be exercised to quash proceedings, including cases where allegations do not constitute the offense alleged. - In State of Karnataka v. L. Muniswamy, the Court observed that the High Court has the power to quash proceedings to prevent abuse of the process of the court. - In State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, the Court provided illustrative categories where such power could be exercised, including cases where allegations do not prima facie constitute any offense or are inherently improbable. The Supreme Court in the present case found that the complaint was filed with an oblique motive and was frivolous. The allegations were baseless and without foundation, making the charges under Sections 427 and 447 IPC wholly illegal and unsustainable in law. The Court emphasized that the High Court should have quashed the complaint to prevent abuse of the process of law. Conclusion: The Supreme Court concluded that the filing of such a frivolous complaint was a total abuse of the process of law. Consequently, the impugned judgment of the High Court was set aside, and the complaint emanating from Crime No. 281 of 2004, Police Station, Uppal, Hyderabad, was quashed. The appeal was allowed and disposed of accordingly.
|
