9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Challenge to order quashing criminal proceedings, Settlement of civil liability affecting criminal case, Power of High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C., Compounding of offences, Interpretation of relevant case laws Analysis: The Supreme Court heard an appeal by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) challenging the High Court's order quashing criminal proceedings against certain respondents. The respondents were accused of conspiring with bank officials to secure more loans than entitled to by inflating creditworthiness figures of represented companies. The High Court's decision was based on the settlement of civil liability between the parties through consent decrees in suits filed by the bank for recovery. The CBI argued that settlement of civil liability cannot justify the premature termination of criminal cases when a criminal offense is disclosed. The CBI further contended that the gravity of the offenses alleged, which were non-compoundable, warranted continuation of criminal proceedings. The respondents, on the other hand, relied on past judgments to support the High Court's decision, emphasizing that settlement of civil suits could amount to compounding of offenses like cheating. They also argued that the power of the High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is not limited by the provisions of compounding offenses under Section 320 Cr.P.C. The accused respondents were charged under Sections 120-B/420 IPC, and the respondents, not being public servants, argued that no substantive offense under the Prevention of Corruption Act could be alleged against them. They disputed the relevance of a specific judgment to the present case due to the nature of the offenses alleged. The Supreme Court considered the settled civil liability between the parties and the non-compoundable nature of the offenses charged. It noted that while the offense under Section 420 IPC is compoundable, the offense under Section 120-B is not. The Court found that the High Court's exercise of power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to prevent abuse of process of law or serve the ends of justice was justified in this case. The Court declined to interfere with the High Court's order and dismissed the appeal, clarifying that the proceedings were interfered with only in respect of two accused respondents. In conclusion, the Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision to quash criminal proceedings against the accused respondents based on the settlement of civil liability and the non-compoundable nature of the offenses charged. The Court emphasized the High Court's power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to prevent abuse of the legal process and ensure justice.
|
