9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 1762X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and's desire? HELD THAT:- In CBI v. Maninder Singh [ 2015 (8) TMI 1535 - SUPREME COURT] , the allegation against the accused was that bill of lading presented by the proprietors of the accused firms were found forged and cases were registered Under Section 120B Indian Penal Code read with Section 420 Indian Penal Code and Section 5(2) read with Section 5(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 and further substantive offences Under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 Indian Penal Code. The accused person arrived at a settlement with the Bank and thereafter moved the High Court Under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing of the FIR. The High Court placed reliance on the decision in Nikhil Merchant [ 2008 (8) TMI 966 - SUPREME COURT] and allowed the petition and directed for quashing of the criminal proceedings. The High Court has been erroneously guided by the ambit and sweep of power Under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing the proceedings. It has absolutely fallaciously opined that the continuance of the proceeding will be the abuse of the process of the Court. It has been categorically held in JANATA DAL VERSUS H.S. CHOWDHARY [ 1992 (8) TMI 301 - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t seeking exercise of inherent jurisdiction Under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Code of Criminal Procedure) or the extraordinary jurisdiction Under Article 226 of the Constitution for quashment of the criminal proceedings; and should the High Court on the foundation that the continuance of the criminal proceedings would be a Sisyphean endeavour after the settlement has taken place to quash the same; and further whether a former Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes can be allowed to advance a plea, obviously a remarkable one, that she had signed the documents either as a guarantor or as a co-applicant, showing deference to her late husband's desire; and, therefore, this Court, in exercise of power Under Article 136 of the Constitution, should not unsettle the common order by which the High Court has quashed criminal proceedings. Additionally, it has also become obligatory to decisively lay down whether continuance of such proceedings would be an unnecessary load on the criminal justice dispensation system and hence, there is neither any warrant nor justification for interference with the order of the High Court. We are invited by the astute proponements to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2011 for quashing of the criminal proceedings. During the pendency of the cases, the husband, accused No. 1 breathed his last and thereafter before the High Court it was contended that she was not aware of any transaction done by her husband as she was working as a public servant and that apart she was not aware of the business activities carried on by her husband; that she had signed the documents as instructed by her husband without any intention or knowledge to cheat the banks; that after demise of her husband, she had come to know about the cases pending against her due to the alleged involvement of her husband and immediately she had taken necessary steps to settle the entire dues of the banks and, therefore, there was no justification for continuance of the criminal proceedings. The stand and stance put forth by the accused person was combated by the prosecution on the ground that she was in employment in Commercial Tax Department in the rank of Assistant Commissioner and had availed voluntary retirement and hence, she could not claim ignorance of the transaction despite being a co-applicant to the loans by executing the pronotes jointly along with her husband as a borrower ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sed cannot be absolved from the criminal culpability without the trial taking place. 7. Resisting the aforesaid submissions it is canvassed by Mr. Tankha, learned Senior Counsel for the first Respondent that when the High Court, considering the controversy from all the requisite angles has quashed the proceedings, this Court should not interfere with the impugned order in exercise of its jurisdiction Under Article 136 of the Constitution. Learned Senior Counsel would contend that when the Respondent has already paid the amount due to the Bank from her own savings and settled the matter with grieved financial institutions, continuance of the criminal proceeding is not desirable as it is unlikely to serve any fruitful purpose. That apart, submits Mr. Tankha, continuation of the proceeding would unnecessarily load the criminal justice dispensation system as there is likelihood of an order of acquittal at the end of the trial. 8. To appreciate the submissions advanced at the bar, we may straightaway refer to the authority in State of Maharashtra through CBI v. Vikram Anantrai Doshi and Ors. 2014 (10) SCALE 690. In the said case, the accused was charged for the offences punishable Under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nal cases where the allegations made in the first information report or the complaint, even if are taken on their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused. When we apply the settled legal position to the facts of this case it is not possible to conclude that the complaint and the charge-sheet prima facie do not constitute any offence against the Respondents. Being of this view, the Court in A. Ravishankar Prasad (supra) allowed the appeal preferred by the CBI. 9. Apart from above, in Vikram Anantrai Doshi and Ors. (supra) the Court referred to Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Anr. (2012) 10 SCC 303, with regard to the power of the High Court as regards the quashing of the criminal proceedings on the basis of a compromise. This Court also referred to Narinder Singh and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Anr. (2014) 6 SCC 466, Dimpy Gujral v. Union Territory through Administrator AIR 2012 SCW 5333 and State of Rajasthan v. Sambhu Kevat 2013 (14) SCALE 235 and thereafter dwelt upon the ratio in CBI, ACB, Mumbai v. Narendra Lal Jain and Ors. (2014) 5 SCC 364 wherein the charges were framed Under Section 120B re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... offence creates a dent in the economic spine of the nation. The cleverness which has been skillfully contrived, if the allegations are true, has a serious consequence. A crime of this nature, in our view, would definitely fall in the category of offences which travel far ahead of personal or private wrong. It has the potentiality to usher in economic crisis. Its implications have its own seriousness, for it creates a concavity in the solemnity that is expected in financial transactions. It is not such a case where one can pay the amount and obtain a no due certificate and enjoy the benefit of quashing of the criminal proceeding on the hypostasis that nothing more remains to be done. The collective interest of which the Court is the guardian cannot be a silent or a mute spectator to allow the proceedings to be withdrawn, or for that matter yield to the ingenuous dexterity of the accused persons to invoke the jurisdiction Under Article 226 of the Constitution or Under Section 482 of the Code and quash the proceeding. It is not legally permissible. The Court is expected to be on guard to these kinds of adroit moves. The High Court, we humbly remind, should have dealt with the matter ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... roceedings. In economic offences Court must not only keep in view that money has been paid to the bank which has been defrauded but also the society at large. It is not a case of simple assault or a theft of a trivial amount; but the offence with which we are concerned is a well planned and was committed with a deliberate design with an eye of personal profit regardless of consequence to the society at large. To quash the proceeding merely on the ground that the accused has settled the amount with the bank would be a misplaced sympathy. 12. Testing the present controversy on the anvil of the aforesaid principles, we are disposed to think that the High Court has been erroneously guided by the ambit and sweep of power Under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing the proceedings. It has absolutely fallaciously opined that the continuance of the proceeding will be the abuse of the process of the Court. It has been categorically held in Janta Dal v. H.S. Chowdhary (1992) 4 SCC 305, that the inherent power Under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure though unrestricted and undefined should not be capriciously or arbitrarily exercised, but should be exercised in appropriate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
