2019 (7) TMI 1867 - SC - Indian Laws

Inherent jurisdiction of the Court under Section 482 of CrPC - attempt to murder - HELD THAT - In this case, the High Court rightly refused to quash the criminal complaint, observing that it can exercise power under Section 482 of the CrPC only in rare cases. The power to quash the proceedings is generally exercised when there is no material to proceed against the Petitioners even if the allegations in the complaint are prima facie accepted as true. The High Court in effect found, and rightly, that the allegations in the complaint coupled with the statements recorded by the learned Magistrate had the necessary ingredients of offences under Sections 307, 323, 427, 447 and 506(2) read with Section 34 of the IPC. This is not a fit case to quash the criminal proceedings - Appeal dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against judgment dismissing Criminal Petition to quash criminal proceedings under IPC sections. Allegations of causing injuries, threats, and false implication. Exercise of inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of CrPC. Criteria for interference under Section 482. High Court's refusal to quash criminal complaint.

Analysis:
The appeal challenged the High Court's decision to dismiss the Criminal Petition seeking to quash criminal proceedings under various IPC sections. The Appellants and the de facto complainant were involved in a partition suit and a previous criminal complaint. The Appellants claimed false implication by the de facto complainant as retaliation. The High Court found the allegations serious and falling under punishable offenses, rejecting the Appellants' counter blast argument due to timing discrepancies.

The Appellants contended that one of them, a Lecturer, was falsely implicated and raised questions about their presence during the alleged incident. The High Court rightly noted that such factual issues should be determined during trial through evidence. The Court emphasized the cautious exercise of inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of CrPC to prevent abuse of process and ensure justice, highlighting the need for grave injustice for interference.

The High Court's decision was based on established principles that the power under Section 482 should not stifle legitimate prosecution but can be used if the offense's basic elements are absent. Quashing is permissible if the allegations do not constitute any offense, emphasizing the prevention of abuse of court processes. The Court cited precedents to support its decision and outlined guidelines for exercising power under Section 482.

In this case, the High Court correctly declined to quash the criminal complaint, citing the rare nature of cases warranting such action. The Court found the allegations, supported by recorded statements, sufficient to establish offenses under IPC sections. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, affirming the High Court's decision not to quash the criminal proceedings.