9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (7) TMI 1436X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ndent in the presence of a listed witness and that she conspired with her sister, the principal accused, to cheat and defraud the second respondent, persuade to record that involvement of the petitioner, howsoever limited, cannot be ruled out at this stage and, therefore, the trial ought to be permitted to proceed and she obliged to stand trial. The impugned judgment and order of the High Court dismissing the petition under section 482, Cr.P.C. - Appeal dismissed. - S. RAVINDRA BHAT AND DIPANKAR DATTA JJ. For Petitioner : Mr. Kunal Verma, AOR Mrs. Yugandhara Pawar Jha, Adv. Mr. Ashwin Kumar Nair, Adv. Ms. Lavanya Dhawan, Adv. Mr. Ritik Gupta, Adv. For Respondent : Mr. Anil Kaushik, A.A.G. Dr. Monika Gusain, AOR Mr. Vardhman Kaushik, AOR Mr. Naresh Kaushik, Adv. Mr. Manoj Joshi, Adv. Mr. Nishant Gautam, Adv. Mr. Dhruv Joshi, Adv. Mr. Anand Singh, Adv. Mr. Shubham Dwivedi, Adv. Ms. Shikha John, Adv. JUDGMENT DIPANKAR DATTA, J. Leave granted. 2. Based on a complaint lodged by the second respondent, Thanesar city Police Station FIR No.658 dated 2nd August, 2020 was registered under sections 406, 420, 506 and 120B, Indian Penal Code ( IPC , hereafter) against 7 (seven) accused which, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sheet being received, the criminal court took cognizance of the offence and thereafter charges were framed against the accused by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kurukshetra ( CJM , hereafter) by an order dated 18th July, 2022. Such order was challenged by the petitioner under section 397, Cr. PC. The Additional Sessions Judge, Kurukshetra, ( ASJ , hereafter), by an order dated 27th September, 2022, dismissed the revision as lacking in merit. 8. At this stage, the High Court s jurisdiction under section 482, Cr. PC was invoked by the petitioner subjecting the charge-sheet dated 14th February, 2022, the order of the CJM framing charges dated 18th July, 2022 and the revisional order of the ASJ 27th September, 2022 to challenge. The High Court referred to various judicial precedents outlining the contours of exercise of jurisdiction by the high courts while they are approached for quashing an FIR / a complaint and / or criminal proceedings. Relying on such precedents and based on formation of opinion that there was sufficient material found against the petitioner in course of investigation, the High Court by its impugned judgment and order dated 11th November, 2022 spurned the challeng ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ry for which the parties met several times and that the principal accused received such amount of money as indicated therein. 14. All these documents which the petitioner seeks to rely on, if genuine, could be helpful for her defence at the trial but the same are not material at the stage of deciding whether quashing as prayed by her before the High Court was warranted or not. We, therefore, see no reason to place any reliance on these three documents. 15. The fourth document which has been brought on record in support of the petitioner s claim for quashing of the proceedings against her is the statement of the second respondent under section 161 of the Cr. PC. Therein, inter alia, it was stated by the second respondent that Rs. 9.50 lakh was paid in cash by her to the principal accused at a particular house (House No. 620 in Sector-4, Kurukshetra) where the principal accused, the petitioner and their mother were present and that on receipt of such sum of money in cash, those (meaning thereby the principal accused, the petitioner and their mother) counted the money which was ultimately kept with the principal accused. This, the second respondent said, happened in the presence of he ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ough there are no limits of the powers of the Court under Section 482 of the Code but the more the power, the more due care and caution is to be exercised in invoking these powers. The power of quashing criminal proceedings, particularly, the charge framed in terms of Section 228 of the Code should be exercised very sparingly and with circumspection and that too in the rarest of rare cases. 27.2. The Court should apply the test as to whether the uncontroverted allegations as made from the record of the case and the documents submitted therewith prima facie establish the offence or not. If the allegations are so patently absurd and inherently improbable that no prudent person can ever reach such a conclusion and where the basic ingredients of a criminal offence are not satisfied then the Court may interfere. 27.3. The High Court should not unduly interfere. No meticulous examination of the evidence is needed for considering whether the case would end in conviction or not at the stage of framing of charge or quashing of charge. 27.4. Where the exercise of such power is absolutely essential to prevent patent miscarriage of justice and for correcting some grave error that might be comm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ence is even broadly satisfied, the Court should be more inclined to permit continuation of prosecution rather than its quashing at that initial stage. The Court is not expected to marshal the records with a view to decide admissibility and reliability of the documents or records but is an opinion formed prima facie. 27.14. Where the charge-sheet, report under Section 173(2) of the Code, suffers from fundamental legal defects, the Court may be well within its jurisdiction to frame a charge. 27.15. Coupled with any or all of the above, where the Court finds that it would amount to abuse of process of the Code or that the interest of justice favours, otherwise it may quash the charge. The power is to be exercised ex debito justitiae i.e. to do real and substantial justice for administration of which alone, the courts exist. *** 27.16. These are the principles which individually and preferably cumulatively (one or more) be taken into consideration as precepts to exercise of extraordinary and wide plenitude and jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code by the High Court. Where the factual foundation for an offence has been laid down, the courts should be reluctant and should not haste ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that after getting her statement dated 30.07.2021 recorded, petitioner refused to sign her statement for which she was also charge sheeted for commission of an offence under section 180 IPC. 22. We are aghast to note that an officer of the rank of DSP could be so irresponsible while swearing an affidavit which is proposed to be filed before this Court. An officer, who is a DSP, ought to know that in terms of section 162, Cr. PC, no statement made by a person to a police officer in the course of any investigation under Chapter XII of the Cr. PC, which is reduced to writing, is required to be signed by the person making the statement and that section 180 of the IPC gets attracted only if a statement is refused to be signed which a public servant is legally competent to require the person making the statement to sign. That is not the case here. Since the deponent has not been heard by us, we do not propose to take the issue further but warn him to be cautious in future. 23. It does not appear from the order dated 18th July, 2022 of the CJM that any charge has been framed against the petitioner under section 180 of the IPC; however, if any charge thereunder by any separate order has b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
