2024 (9) TMI 1352 - SC - Indian Laws

Seeking laying down appropriate guidelines to be followed by all including the police officials and Judicial Magistrate to desist from initiating or directing initiation of criminal proceedings - HELD THAT - In the case on hand, the Enforcement Directorate, New Delhi, was impleaded as a party respondent in the writ petition on 04.07.2023, by way of the final order disposing of the case. The final order was passed without putting it on notice and affording it an opportunity of hearing. Therefore, the directions of this Court in the said order in relation to ECIR No. ECIR/HIU-1/06/2023 cannot be sustained. More so, as the final order only records that the interlocutory applications for impleadment and to bring on record additional facts were allowed and no more. Further, though this Court relegated the writ petitioners to the jurisdictional High Courts for challenging the FIRs registered against them, certain errors crept in by oversight while doing so. As regards FIR No. 197 of 2023, this Court directed that no coercive steps should be taken in relation thereto against the petitioner financial institution and its people till final disposal of such a petition by the High Court. Having said that, this Court went on to observe that it would be open to the writ petitioners to seek stay of proceedings in relation thereto, which was to be considered by the High Court on merits. When a party is relegated to the High Court to pursue its remedies, it would not be proper, in the normal course, to bind the said High Court with directions in relation to the proceedings to be impugned before such Court. Ordinarily, this Court would leave all issues open for the party so relegated to raise and pursue before the High Court. The miscellaneous applications and the interlocutory applications are disposed of accordingly.

Issues Involved:
1. Guidelines for initiating criminal proceedings against financial institutions.
2. Quashing of FIRs registered by disgruntled defaulting borrowers.
3. Imposition of exemplary costs for abuse of process of law.
4. Stay of proceedings related to FIRs and ECIR.
5. Modification and recall of the order dated 04.07.2023.
6. Hearing of the Enforcement Directorate's application.
7. Procedural errors and oversight in the order dated 04.07.2023.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Guidelines for Initiating Criminal Proceedings Against Financial Institutions:
The petitioners prayed for the issuance of a writ, order, or direction in the nature of mandamus to lay down appropriate guidelines to prevent the initiation of criminal proceedings against financial institutions by disgruntled defaulting borrowers. This was aimed at protecting the fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution of India.

2. Quashing of FIRs Registered by Disgruntled Defaulting Borrowers:
The petitioners sought a writ, order, or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash three FIRs mentioned in Table 1 of the writ petition, which were registered at the instance of disgruntled defaulting borrowers. They argued that these FIRs were an abuse of the process of law, giving a criminal color to civil disputes.

3. Imposition of Exemplary Costs for Abuse of Process of Law:
The petitioners requested the imposition of exemplary costs on the respondents for abusing the process of law by initiating criminal proceedings against them.

4. Stay of Proceedings Related to FIRs and ECIR:
An interim order dated 28.04.2023 granted a stay of all proceedings pursuant to the impugned FIRs. The petitioners later sought to include additional facts and prayers to quash FIR No. 197 of 2023 and ECIR No. ECIR/HIU-1/06/2023. The Court allowed the petitioners to approach the jurisdictional High Courts to challenge all four FIRs and the ECIR within two weeks, directing that no coercive steps should be taken against the petitioner financial institution and its officers until the final disposal of the petitions by the High Courts.

5. Modification and Recall of the Order Dated 04.07.2023:
The order dated 04.07.2023 led to the filing of miscellaneous and interlocutory applications seeking its modification and recall. The Enforcement Directorate, New Delhi, sought recall of the order as it was not heard before the disposal of the case with directions adverse to it.

6. Hearing of the Enforcement Directorate's Application:
The Court noted that no adverse order should be passed against a party without hearing it, a fundamental principle of natural justice. The Enforcement Directorate's application for recall was premised on the ground that it was not given a hearing prior to the passing of the order dated 04.07.2023. The Court held that the directions in relation to ECIR No. ECIR/HIU-1/06/2023 could not be sustained as the Enforcement Directorate was not heard.

7. Procedural Errors and Oversight in the Order Dated 04.07.2023:
The Court acknowledged that certain errors crept in by oversight while relegating the petitioners to the jurisdictional High Courts. Specifically, the Court noted that the directions to seek stay of proceedings before the High Court were unnecessary once no coercive steps were permitted in connection with FIR No. 197 of 2023. Additionally, the stay of proceedings granted in relation to the first three FIRs was directed to continue until the disposal of the writ petitions before the High Courts, which could be misconstrued by the High Courts as observations on the merits of the matter.

Conclusion:
The Court modified the order dated 04.07.2023, recalling it insofar as it pertained to ECIR No. ECIR/HIU-1/06/2023 and substituting the words "till final disposal of the respective petitions..." with "till the filing of the respective petitions." This allowed the High Courts to entertain applications for interim relief and consider the main cases on their own merits. The miscellaneous and interlocutory applications were disposed of accordingly, and the Registry was directed to upload and attach a corrigendum to the order dated 04.07.2023.

← Previous Next →