9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (1) TMI 1267 - SC - Indian LawsSetting aside the criminal proceedings in exercise of the powers under Section 482, CrPC - offences under Sections 124A, 153A, 504, 505(1)(b) and 505(2) of the IPC in exercise of powers under Section 482, CrPC - HELD THAT - From the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court and the reasoning given by the High Court, it appears that the High Court has quashed the criminal proceedings as if the High Court was conducting the mini trial. The scope and ambiguity of powers to be exercised under Section 482, CrPC has been elaborately dealt with and considered by this Court in the case of M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. 2021 (4) TMI 1244 - SUPREME COURT . Even otherwise, it is a settled position of law that while exercising powers under Section 482, CrPC, the High Court is not required to conduct the mini trial. What is required to be considered at that stage is the nature of accusations and allegations in the FIR and whether the averments/allegations in the FIR prima facie discloses the commission of the cognizable offence or not. As per the settled position of law, it is the right conferred upon the Investigating Agency to conduct the investigation and reasonable time should be given to the Investigating Agency to conduct the investigation unless it is found that the allegations in the FIR do not disclose any cognizable offence at all or the complaint is barred by any law. Under the circumstances also, the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court quashing and setting aside the criminal proceedings deserves to be quashed and set aside. The impugned judgment order passed by the High Court quashing the criminal proceedings is hereby quashed and set aside - Appeal allowed.
Issues involved:
Appeal against quashing of criminal proceedings under Section 482, CrPC by High Court. Analysis: The State filed an appeal against the judgment and order of the High Court quashing criminal proceedings under Sections 124A, 153A, 504, 505(1)(b), and 505(2) of the IPC. The State contended that the High Court exceeded its jurisdiction under Section 482, CrPC and conducted a mini trial, contrary to established principles. The High Court quashed the proceedings hastily without giving sufficient time for investigation. The appellant argued that the High Court's decision was unsustainable and against legal precedents. The Supreme Court observed that the High Court's actions were in contrast to established principles of law and the decision in M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. The Court reiterated that the judiciary and police functions are complementary, and courts should not interfere in investigations except in exceptional cases to prevent miscarriage of justice. The Court emphasized that the power under Section 482, CrPC is wide but requires caution and self-restraint. The High Court's decision to quash the proceedings without allowing the Investigating Agency sufficient time was deemed improper. The Court held that the High Court's judgment was unsustainable and quashed the quashing order. The Supreme Court highlighted that under Section 482, CrPC, the High Court should not conduct a mini trial but assess whether the allegations in the FIR prima facie disclose a cognizable offense. The Court emphasized the importance of allowing the Investigating Agency reasonable time to conduct investigations unless the FIR lacks merit or is legally barred. The Court reiterated that quashing of proceedings should be an exception and not a routine practice. The judgment emphasized the need for courts to exercise caution and self-restraint when using the wide powers conferred under Section 482, CrPC. The Court noted that the High Court's haste in quashing the proceedings without adequate investigation time was improper and against established legal principles. The judgment underscored the importance of upholding the rights of the Investigating Agency and ensuring proper investigation procedures are followed. In conclusion, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the High Court's judgment quashing the criminal proceedings. The Court emphasized the need for adherence to legal principles, caution in exercising powers under Section 482, CrPC, and providing the Investigating Agency with adequate time to conduct thorough investigations. The judgment reiterated the importance of upholding the rule of law and ensuring that judicial processes do not impede investigations unjustly.
|
