2024 (2) TMI 773 - SC - Money Laundering

Powers of the High Courts in staying the investigations or directing not to take coercive action against the accused pending petitions u/s 482 of Cr.PC - allegation of defaults in the repayment of loan amount - a series of litigations under the SARFAESI Act before the DRT and High Court had ensued between the parties - High Court has stayed the proceedings of the FIRs registered against the concerned respondents-accused as also stayed the proceedings of ECIR registered by the Directorate of Enforcement against the concerned respondents, and further directed not to take any coercive action against the said respondents pending the said writ petitions HELD THAT - As it s a matter of serious concern that despite the legal position settled by this Court in catena of decisions, the High Court has passed the impugned orders staying the investigations of the FIRs and ECIR in question in utter disregard of the said settled legal position. Without undermining the powers of the High Court under Section 482 of Cr.PC to quash the proceedings if the allegations made in the FIR or complaint prima facie do not constitute any offence against the accused, or if the criminal proceedings are found to be manifestly malafide or malicious, instituted with ulterior motive etc., we are of the opinion that the High Court could not have stayed the investigations and restrained the investigating agencies from investigating into the cognizable offences as alleged in the FIRs and the ECIR, particularly when the investigations were at a very nascent stage. It hardly needs to be reiterated that the inherent powers under Section 482 of Cr.PC do not confer any arbitrary jurisdiction on the High Court to act according to whims or caprice. The statutory power has to be exercised sparingly with circumspection and in the rarest of rare cases. In a way, by passing such orders of staying the investigations and restraining the investigating agencies from taking any coercive measure against the accused pending the petitions under Section 482 Cr.PC, the High Court has granted blanket orders restraining the arrest without the accused applying for the anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Cr.PC. This Court in State of Telangana vs. Habib Abdullah Jeelani and Others 2017 (1) TMI 1683 - SUPREME COURT while dealing with the contours of Section 482 and 438 Cr.PC had emphasized that the direction not to arrest the accused or not to take coercive action against the accused in the proceedings u/s 482 Cr.PC, would amount to an order under Section 438 Cr.PC, albeit without satisfaction of the conditions of the said provision, which is legally unacceptable. As discernible from the record, number of proceedings had ensued between the parties pursuant to the actions taken by the IHFL against the complainant-borrower for the recovery of its dues under the SARFAESI Act, and the borrower M/s Shipra after having failed in the said proceedings had filed the complaints with ulterior motives. We do not propose to examine the merits of the said submissions as the writ petitions filed by the concerned respondents-accused seeking quashing of the FIRs on such grounds are pending for consideration before the High Court. It would be open for the High Court to examine the merits of the petitions and decide the same in accordance with law. The impugned orders passed by the High Court being not in consonance with the settled legal position, the same deserve to be set aside and are hereby set aside. The impugned interim orders passed by the High Court qua the concerned respondents-accused in the present appeals stand vacated forthwith.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Interim orders staying FIR and ECIR proceedings.
2. Legal position on staying investigations and coercive actions.
3. Merits of the allegations and proceedings under SARFAESI Act.

Summary:

1. Interim Orders Staying FIR and ECIR Proceedings:
The appellants challenged the interim orders dated 13.07.2023, 08.08.2023, and 13.09.2023 by the Allahabad High Court, which stayed the proceedings of FIRs and ECIR against the respondents and directed no coercive action pending the writ petitions. The High Court's orders were based on an earlier Supreme Court order dated 04.07.2023 in a related case, which had stayed certain FIRs and ECIR proceedings.

2. Legal Position on Staying Investigations and Coercive Actions:
The Supreme Court emphasized that the High Court's orders were in disregard of the settled legal position. The Court cited the Three-Judge Bench decision in *Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra*, which strongly deprecated the practice of staying investigations or directing non-coercive actions against accused individuals. The inherent powers under Section 482 of Cr.PC should be exercised sparingly and not to thwart investigations into cognizable offenses. The Court reiterated that such interim orders should not be passed routinely and must demonstrate the application of mind with brief reasons.

3. Merits of the Allegations and Proceedings under SARFAESI Act:
The respondents argued that the FIRs were of a civil nature given a criminal color and were filed with ulterior motives after failing in proceedings under the SARFAESI Act. The Supreme Court did not delve into the merits of these submissions, leaving it to the High Court to decide the writ petitions on their own merits.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's impugned orders, stating they were not in consonance with the settled legal position and vacated the interim orders staying the FIR and ECIR proceedings. The Court clarified that it did not express any opinion on the merits of the pending writ petitions and allowed the appeals accordingly.