9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (7) TMI 1550X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ction 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has to be exercised sparingly, carefully and with caution and only when such exercise is justified by the tests specifically laid down in the Section itself. As held by this Court in STATE OF A.P. VERSUS GOURISHETTY MAHESH AND ORS. [ 2010 (7) TMI 1208 - SUPREME COURT ], the High Court, while exercising jurisdiction Under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, would not ordinarily embark upon an enquiry into whether the evidence is reliable or not or whether there is reasonable possibility that the accusation would not be sustained. Offence Under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code of abetment to commit suicide is a grave, non-compoundable offence. Of course, the inherent power of the High Court Under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is wide and can even be exercised to quash criminal proceedings relating to non-compoundable offences, to secure the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of the process of Court. Where the victim and offender have compromised disputes essentially civil and personal in nature, the High Court can exercise its power Under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the criminal pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... plication Nos. 5026 of 2020, 5600 of 2020, 5107 of 2020, 5004 of 2020, 5108 of 2020, 5165 of 2020, 5159 of 2020, 5161 of 2020, 5524 of 2020, 5166 of 2020, 5162 of 2020, 5739 of 2020 and quashing the FIR being C.R. No. I-11209016200112 dated 1st March 2020 registered with Himmatnagar 'A' Division Police Station, District Sabarkantha, and also the order dated 29th July 2021 passed by the High Court dismissing the Criminal Miscellaneous Applications filed by the Appellant, registered as R/Criminal Misc. Application Nos. 10845 of 2021, 10846 of 2021, 10847 of 2021, 10848 of 2021, 10849 of 2021, 10850 of 2021, 10851 of 2021, 10852 of 2021, 10853 of 2021, 10855 of 2021, 10856 of 2021, 10858 of 2021 for recalling the said common final order dated 20th October 2020. 3. The Appellant is the wife of late Shaileshkumar Chimanbhai Patel, hereinafter referred to as the deceased , who is stated to have committed suicide on 1st March 2020 by consuming poison in his office. 4. One Pinakin Kantibhai Patel, claiming to be a cousin of the deceased, as also an Accountant working for the deceased, lodged an FIR being C.R. No. I-11209016200112 dated 1st March 2020 with Himmatnagar Police Station ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ank except Vijaysinh. Kamalpal Minerals Pvt. Limited of Vijaysinh was given Rs. 18,52,000/-. 7. In the FIR, it was alleged that the deceased had been making phone calls to the Accused persons calling upon them to return his money, but they did not do so. The Accused had cheated the deceased of Rs. 2,35,73,200/-. The deceased was in acute financial crunch and, therefore, constrained to take his own life. 8. Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code reads: 306. Abetment of suicide. -If any person commits suicide, whoever abets the commission of such suicide, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine. 9. As argued by Ms. Shenoy, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondents, what is required to constitute alleged abetment of suicide Under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code is that there must be an allegation of either direct or indirect act of incitement to the commission of the offence of suicide. 10. Ms. Shenoy cited M. Arjunan v. State, Represented by its Inspector of Police (2019) 3 SCC 315, where this Court held: 7. The essential ingredients of the offence Under Section 306 Ind ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... other option except to commit suicide, the case may fall within the four corners of Section 306 Indian Penal Code. If the Accused plays an active role in tarnishing the self-esteem and self-respect of the victim, which eventually draws the victim to commit suicide, the Accused may be held guilty of abetment of suicide. The question of mens rea on the part of the Accused in such cases would be examined with reference to the actual acts and deeds of the Accused and if the acts and deeds are only of such nature where the Accused intended nothing more than harassment or snap show of anger, a particular case may fall short of the offence of abetment of suicide. However, if the Accused kept on irritating or annoying the deceased by words or deeds until the deceased reacted or was provoked, a particular case may be that of abetment of suicide. Such being the matter of delicate analysis of human behaviour, each case is required to be examined on its own facts, while taking note of all the surrounding factors having bearing on the actions and psyche of the Accused and the deceased. 12. Ms. Shenoy referred to Ramesh Kumar v. State of Chhattisgarh (2001) 9 SCC 618, where this Court defined & ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... proceedings would amount to abuse of process of law. Therefore, the impugned FIR is required to be quashed and set aside. 10. Resultantly, the applications are allowed. The impugned FIR being No. C.R. No. I-11209016200112 of 2020 registered with Himmatnagar 'A' Division Police Station, District Sabarkantha and all other consequential proceedings arising out of said FIR are hereby quashed and set aside qua the applicants. 19. By the common order dated 29th July 2021, also impugned in these appeals, the prayer of the Appellant for recalling the order dated 20th October 2020 was declined. The High Court held: 22. ...However, as discussed herein above, this Court has passed an order dated 20.10.2020 after considering the settlement arrived at between the original first informant, who is cousin brother of the deceased and was working as an Accountant of the firm of the deceased. Further, investigating agency has verified about the genuineness of the settlement arrived at between the parties. It is not in dispute that the present Applicant is a third party - as stated in Paragraph No. 1 of the application and, hence, so far as the FIR in question is concerned, she is merely a wit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rs can be exercised to recall such orders. 22. The High Court rightly found, in effect, that it had the inherent power to recall a judgment and/or order which was without jurisdiction or a judgment and/or order passed without hearing a person prejudicially affected by the judgment and/or order. The High Court, however, fell in error in not recalling the order dated 20th October 2020. The High Court did not address to itself, the question of whether it had jurisdiction to quash a criminal complaint Under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code, which is a grave non-compoundable offence, entailing imprisonment of ten years, on the basis of a settlement between the parties. 23. The High Court erred in declining the prayer of the Appellant for recalling its order dated 20th October 2020, passed without hearing the wife of the deceased only because the original informant/complainant, a cousin brother and an employee of the deceased had been heard. Hearing a cousin-cum-employee of the deceased cannot and does not dispense with the requirement to give the wife of the deceased a hearing. The wife of the deceased would have greater interest than cousins and employees in prosecuting Accused per ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gs. However, interference would only be justified when the complaint did not disclose any offence, or was patently frivolous, vexatious or oppressive, as held by this Court in Mrs. Dhanalakshmi v. R. Prasanna Kumar AIR 1990 SC 494 : 1990 Supp SCC 686. 30. In Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Ram Kishan Rohtagi and Ors. (1983) 1 SCC 1, a three-Judge Bench of this Court held: 6. It may be noticed that Section 482 of the present Code is the ad verbatim copy of Section 561-A of the old Code. This provision confers a separate and independent power on the High Court alone to pass orders ex debito justitiae in cases where grave and substantial injustice has been done or where the process of the court has been seriously abused. It is not merely a revisional power meant to be exercised against the orders passed by subordinate courts. It was under this Section that in the old Code, the High Courts used to quash the proceedings or expunge uncalled for remarks against witnesses or other persons or subordinate courts. Thus, the scope, ambit and range of Section 561-A (which is now Section 482) is quite different from the powers conferred by the present Code under the provisions of Section 397. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed by the Magistrate in issuing process is capricious and arbitrary having been based either on no evidence or on materials which are wholly irrelevant or inadmissible; and (4) where the complaint suffers from fundamental legal defects, such as, want of sanction, or absence of a complaint by legally competent authority and the like. The cases mentioned by us are purely illustrative and provide sufficient guidelines to indicate contingencies where the High Court can quash proceedings. 9. Same view was taken in a later decision of this Court in Sharda Prasad Sinha v. State of Bihar [(1977) 1 SCC 505 : 1977 SCC (Cri) 132 : (1977) 2 SCR 357 : 1977 Cri LJ 1146] where Bhagwati, J. speaking for the Court observed as follows : [SCC para 2, p. 506 : SCC (Cri) p. 133] It is now settled law that where the allegations set out in the complaint or the charge-sheet do not constitute any offence, it is competent to the High Court exercising its inherent jurisdiction Under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the order passed by the Magistrate taking cognizance of the offence. 10. It is, therefore, manifestly clear that proceedings against an Accused in the initial stages can be q ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be at a preliminary stage. 34. In Inder Mohan Goswami v. State of Uttaranchal (2007) 12 SCC 1, this Court observed:- 46. The court must ensure that criminal prosecution is not used as an instrument of harassment or for seeking private vendetta or with an ulterior motive to pressurise the Accused. On analysis of the aforementioned cases, we are of the opinion that it is neither possible nor desirable to lay down an inflexible Rule that would govern the exercise of inherent jurisdiction. Inherent jurisdiction of the High Courts Under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure though wide has to be exercised sparingly, carefully and with caution and only when it is justified by the tests specifically laid down in the statute itself and in the aforementioned cases. In view of the settled legal position, the impugned judgment cannot be sustained. 35. It is a well settled proposition of law that criminal prosecution, if otherwise justified, is not vitiated on account of malafides or vendetta. As said by Krishna Iyer, J. in State of Punjab v. Gurdial Singh (1980) 2 SCC 471 if the use of the power for the fulfilment of a legitimate object the actuation or catalysation by malice is not legicid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s 306, 498-A, 304-B etc. incorporated in the Indian Penal Code as a deterrent, with a specific social purpose. 40. In Criminal Jurisprudence, the position of the complainant is only that of the informant. Once an FIR and/or criminal complaint is lodged and a criminal case is started by the State, it becomes a matter between the State and the Accused. The State has a duty to ensure that law and order is maintained in society. It is for the state to prosecute offenders. In case of grave and serious non-compoundable offences which impact society, the informant and/or complainant only has the right of hearing, to the extent of ensuring that justice is done by conviction and punishment of the offender. An informant has no right in law to withdraw the complaint of a non-compoundable offence of a grave, serious and/or heinous nature, which impacts society. 41. In Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303, this Court discussed the circumstances in which the High Court quashes criminal proceedings in case of a non-compoundable offence, when there is a settlement between the parties and enunciated the following principles: 58. Where the High Court quashes a criminal proceeding having r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he State to punish the offender. Hence, even when there is a settlement, the view of the offender and victim will not prevail since it is in the interest of society that the offender should be punished to deter others from committing a similar crime. 43. In State of Maharashtra v. Vikram Anantrai Doshi (2014) 15 SC 29, this Court held: 26. ... availing of money from a nationalised bank in the manner, as alleged by the investigating agency, vividly exposits fiscal impurity and, in a way, financial fraud. The modus operandi as narrated in the charge-sheet cannot be put in the compartment of an individual or personal wrong. It is a social wrong and it has immense societal impact. It is an accepted principle of handling of finance that whenever there is manipulation and cleverly conceived contrivance to avail of these kinds of benefits it cannot be regarded as a case having overwhelmingly and predominatingly civil character. The ultimate victim is the collective. It creates a hazard in the financial interest of the society. The gravity of the offence creates a dent in the economic spine of the nation. ... 44. In CBI v. Maninder Singh (2016) 1 SCC 389, this Court held: 17. ... In econom ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f justice. The provision does not confer new powers. It only recognises and preserves powers which inhere in the High Court. 16.2. The invocation of the jurisdiction of the High Court to quash a first information report or a criminal proceeding on the ground that a settlement has been arrived at between the offender and the victim is not the same as the invocation of jurisdiction for the purpose of compounding an offence. While compounding an offence, the power of the court is governed by the provisions of Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The power to quash Under Section 482 is attracted even if the offence is non-compoundable. 16.3. In forming an opinion whether a criminal proceeding or complaint should be quashed in exercise of its jurisdiction Under Section 482, the High Court must evaluate whether the ends of justice would justify the exercise of the inherent power. 16.4. While the inherent power of the High Court has a wide ambit and plenitude it has to be exercised (i) to secure the ends of justice, or (ii) to prevent an abuse of the process of any court. 16.5. The decision as to whether a complaint or first information report should be quashed on the grou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ereinabove, it is observed and held as under: 15.1. That the power conferred Under Section 482 of the Code to quash the criminal proceedings for the non-compoundable offences Under Section 320 of the Code can be exercised having overwhelmingly and predominantly the civil character, particularly those arising out of commercial transactions or arising out of matrimonial relationship or family disputes and when the parties have resolved the entire dispute amongst themselves; 15.2. Such power is not to be exercised in those prosecutions which involved heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc. Such offences are not private in nature and have a serious impact on society; 15.3. Similarly, such power is not to be exercised for the offences under the special statutes like the Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by public servants while working in that capacity are not to be quashed merely on the basis of compromise between the victim and the offender; 15.4. Offences Under Section 307 Indian Penal Code and the Arms Act, etc. would fall in the category of heinous and serious offences and therefore are to be treated as crim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nish the offender. Hence, even where there is a settlement between the offender and victim the same shall not prevail since it is in interests of the society that offender should be punished which acts as deterrent for others from committing similar crime. On the other hand, there may be offences falling in the category where the correctional objective of criminal law would have to be given more weightage than the theory of deterrent punishment. In such cases, the court may be of the opinion that a settlement between the parties would lead to better relations between them and would resolve a festering private dispute and thus may exercise power Under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing the proceedings or the complaint or the FIR as the case may be. 15. Bearing in mind the above principles which have been laid down, we are of the view that offences for which the Appellants have been charged are in fact offences against society and not private in nature. Such offences have serious impact upon society and continuance of trial of such cases is founded on the overriding effect of public interests in punishing persons for such serious offences. It is neither an offence ar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
