Himachal Pradesh High Court
_____________________________________________________________________ vs State Of Himachal Pradesh And Ors on 29 May, 2023
Author: Sandeep Sharma
Bench: Sandeep Sharma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
.
CrMMO No. 374 of 2023
Date of Decision: 29.5.2023
_____________________________________________________________________
Sh. Surinder Kumar Kaushal and Anr.
.........Petitioners
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors.
.......Respondents
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?
For the Petitioners: Mr. Chandranarayana Singh and Mr. Devender
Sharma, Advocates.
For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar and Mr. B.C.
Verma, Additional Advocates General with Mr.
Rahul Thakur, Mr. Ravi Chauhan and Ms. Avni
Kochhar Mehta, Deputy Advocates General, for the
State.
Mr. Arush Matlotia, Advocate, for respondent No.2.
Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Advocate, for respondent No.3.
___________________________________________________________________________
Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral)
By way of instant petition filed under Section 482 Cr.PC, prayer has been made by the petitioners for quashing of FIR No. 9 of 2022 dated 10.2.2022, under Sections 147, 149, 201 and 323 of IPC, registered at PS Ramshahar, Police District Baddi, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh, as well as consequent proceedings/trial pending adjudication in Case No. ::: Downloaded on - 31/05/2023 20:30:49 :::CIS 2 125/2 of 2022, State v. Pawan, before the learned Additional Chief Judicial .
Magistrate Nalagarh, District Solan, H.P.
2. Precisely, the facts of the case as emerge from the record are that FIR sought to be quashed in the instant proceedings came to be instituted at the behest of respondent-complainant Sh. Rajinder Kumar, who alleged that on 10.2.2022, Patwari of Patwar Circle, Matuli, called all the parties on the spot and asked about their specific possession on the different khasra numbers. He alleged that while he was showing septic tank unauthorizedly constructed on his land, accused named in the FIR, Shakuntla alongwith her daughter Sapna, Surinder Kumar Kaushal, came on the spot and gave him beatings. Complainant alleged that Shakuntla Devi gave blow of Danda on his head, as a result of which, blood started oozing. Complainant also alleged that person namely Pawan and her daughter namely Sapna alias Princee also gave him beatings with fist and kicks. Though police after completion of investigation has already presented challan in the competent court of law, but before same could be taken to its logical end, petitioners namely Surinder Kumar Kaushal and Bhaker Kaushal karanwal, who are accused in the FIR sought to be quashed, have approached this Court for quashing of FIR as well as consequent proceedings, pending in the competent court of law.
::: Downloaded on - 31/05/2023 20:30:49 :::CIS 33. Precisely, the facts of the case as have been highlighted in the .
petition and further canvassed by Mr. C.N. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners are that no case much less under Sections 147, 149, 201 and 323 of IPC is made out against the petitioners and as such, FIR as well as consequential proceedings pending in the competent court of law deserve to be quashed and set-aside. While making this Court peruse contents of FIR as well as final report filed under Section 173 Cr.PC, Mr. C.N. Singh, argued that at no point of time, complainant ever alleged that beatings of any kind were given to her by the petitioners, who had otherwise come on the spot on the askance/directions of the Patwari concerned. He alleged that since all the accused named in the FIR including the petitioners reached on the spot on the directions of the Patwari, it has been wrongly concluded in the final report filed under Section 173 CrPC, that all the accused named in the FIR including the petitioner had reached on the spot with pre-meditated mind/intent. While making this Court peruse complaint made by the respondent No.3, on the basis of which, FIR sought to be quashed, came to be instituted, Mr. Singh argued that at the initial stage, no complaint, if any, was ever lodged by the complainant with regard to beatings, if any, given by the petitioners, rather he had categorically ::: Downloaded on - 31/05/2023 20:30:49 :::CIS 4 stated that he was given blow of danda on his head by accused namely .
Shakuntla Devi.
4. Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General, and Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Advocate, appearing for respondent No.3 while refuting the aforesaid submissions made on behalf of the petitioners vehemently argued that it is not necessary for the complainant to give complete narration of the facts/allegations in the FIR and as such, omission, if any, on the part of the complainant to name the petitioners herein in the FIR as accused, cannot be a ground to quash the FIR especially when independent witnesses adduced on record have specifically stated something specific with regard to beatings given by the petitioners to the complainant and other family members.
5. Before ascertaining the genuineness and correctness of the submissions and counter submissions having been made by the learned counsel for the parties vis-à-vis prayer made in the instant petition, this Court deems it necessary to discuss/elaborate the scope and competence of this Court to quash the criminal proceedings while exercising power under Section 482 of Cr.PC.
6. Hon'ble Apex Court in judgment titled State of Haryana and others vs. Bhajan Lal and others, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335 has laid ::: Downloaded on - 31/05/2023 20:30:49 :::CIS 5 down several principles, which govern the exercise of jurisdiction of High .
Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Before pronouncement of aforesaid judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court, a three-Judge Bench of Hon'ble Court in State of Karnataka vs. L. Muniswamy and others, 1977 (2) SCC 699, held that the High Court is entitled to quash a proceeding, if it comes to the conclusion that allowing the proceeding to continue would be an abuse of the process of the Court or that the ends of justice require that the proceeding ought to be quashed. Relevant para is being reproduced herein below:-
"7....In the exercise of this wholesome power, the High Court is entitled to quash a proceeding if it comes to the conclusion that allowing the proceeding to continue would be an abuse of the process of the Court or that the ends of justice require that the proceeding ought to be quashed. The saving of the High Court's inherent powers, both in civil and criminal matters, is designed to achieve a salutary public purpose which is that a court proceeding ought not to be permitted to degenerate into a weapon of harassment or persecution. In a criminal case, the veiled object behind a lame prosecution, the very nature of the material on which the structure of the prosecution rests and the like would justify the High Court in quashing the proceeding in the interest of justice. The ends of justice are higher than the ends of mere law though justice has got to be administered according to laws made by the legislature. The compelling necessity for making these observations is that without a proper realisation of the object and purpose of the provision which seeks to save the 55 inherent powers of the High Court to do justice, between the State and its subjects, it would be impossible to appreciate the width and contours of that salient jurisdiction."
::: Downloaded on - 31/05/2023 20:30:49 :::CIS 67. Subsequently, Hon'ble Apex Court in Bhajan Lal (supra), has .
elaborately considered the scope and ambit of Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Subsequently, Hon'ble Apex Court in Vineet Kumar and Ors. v. State of U.P. and Anr., while considering the scope of interference under Sections 397 Cr.PC and 482 Cr.PC, by the High Courts, has held that High Court is entitled to quash a proceeding, if it comes to the conclusion that allowing the proceeding to continue would be an abuse of the process of the Court or that the ends of justice require that the proceedings ought to quashed. The Hon'ble Apex Court has further held that the saving of the High Court's inherent powers, both in civil and criminal matters, is designed to achieve a salutary public purpose i.e. a court proceeding ought not to be permitted to degenerate into a weapon of harassment or persecution. In the aforesaid case, the Hon'ble Apex Court taking note of seven categories, where power can be exercised under Section 482 Cr.PC, as enumerated in Bhajan Lal (supra), i.e. where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with malafides and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge, quashed the proceedings.
8. Hon'ble Apex Court in Prashant Bharti v. State (NCT of Delhi), (2013) 9 SCC 293, while drawing strength from its earlier ::: Downloaded on - 31/05/2023 20:30:49 :::CIS 7 judgment titled as Rajiv Thapar and Ors v. Madan Lal Kapoor, (2013) 3 .
SCC 330, has reiterated that High Court has inherent power under Section 482 Cr.PC., to quash the initiation of the prosecution against an accused, at the stage of issuing process, or at the stage of committal, or even at the stage of framing of charge, but such power must always be used with caution, care and circumspection. While invoking its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., the High Court has to be fully satisfied that the material produced by the accused is such, that would lead to the conclusion, that his/their defence is based on sound, reasonable, and indubitable facts and the material adduced on record itself overrules the veracity of the allegations contained in the accusations levelled by the prosecution/complainant. The material relied upon by the accused should be such, as would persuade a reasonable person to dismiss and condemn the actual basis of the accusations as false. In such a situation, the judicial conscience of the High Court would persuade it to exercise its power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash such criminal proceedings, for that would prevent abuse of process of the court, and secure the ends of justice. In the aforesaid judgment titled Prashant Bharti v. State (NCT of Delhi), (2013) 9 SCC 293, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held as under:-
"22. The proposition of law, pertaining to quashing of criminal proceedings, initiated against an accused by a High Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ::: Downloaded on - 31/05/2023 20:30:49 :::CIS 8 (hereinafter referred to as "the Cr.P.C.") has been dealt with .
by this Court in Rajiv Thapar & Ors. vs. Madan Lal Kapoor wherein this Court inter alia held as under: (2013) 3 SCC 330, paras 29-30)
29. The issue being examined in the instant case is the jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., if it chooses to quash the initiation of the prosecution against an accused, at the stage of issuing process, or at the stage of committal, or even at the stage of framing of charges. These are all stages before the commencement of the actual trial. The same parameters would naturally be available for later stages as well. The power vested in the High Court under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., at the stages referred to hereinabove, would have far reaching consequences, inasmuch as, it would negate the prosecution's/complainant's case without allowing the prosecution/complainant to lead evidence. Such a determination must always be rendered with caution, care and circumspection. To invoke its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. the High Court has to be fully satisfied, that the material produced by the accused is such, that would lead to the conclusion, that his/their defence is based on sound, reasonable, and indubitable facts; the material produced is such, as would rule out and displace the assertions contained in the charges levelled against the accused; and the material produced is such, as would clearly reject and overrule the veracity of the allegations contained in the accusations levelled by the prosecution/complainant. It should be sufficient to rule out, reject and discard the accusations levelled by the prosecution/complainant, without the necessity of recording any evidence. For this the material relied upon by the defence should not have been refuted, or alternatively, cannot be justifiably refuted, being material of sterling and impeccable quality. The material relied upon by the accused should be such, as would persuade a reasonable person to dismiss and condemn the actual basis of the accusations as false. In such a situation, the judicial conscience of the High Court would persuade it to exercise its power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. to quash such criminal proceedings, for that would prevent abuse of process of the court, and secure the ends of justice.
30. Based on the factors canvassed in the foregoing paragraphs, we would delineate the following steps to ::: Downloaded on - 31/05/2023 20:30:49 :::CIS 9 determine the veracity of a prayer for quashing, raised by .
an accused by invoking the power vested in the High Court under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.:-
30.1 Step one, whether the material relied upon by the accused is sound, reasonable, and indubitable, i.e., the material is of sterling and impeccable quality?
30.2 Step two, whether the material relied upon by the accused, would rule out the assertions contained in the charges levelled against the accused, i.e., the material is sufficient to reject and overrule the factual assertions contained in the complaint, i.e., the material is such, as would persuade a reasonable person to dismiss and condemn the factual basis of the accusations as false. 30.3 Step three, whether the material relied upon by the accused, has not been refuted by the prosecution/complainant; and/or the material is such, that it cannot be justifiably refuted by the prosecution/complainant?
30.4 Step four, whether proceeding with the trial would result in an abuse of process of the court, and would not serve the ends of justice?
30.5 If the answer to all the steps is in the affirmative, judicial conscience of the High Court should persuade it to quash such criminal - proceedings, in exercise of power vested in it under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. Such exercise of power, besides doing justice to the accused, would save precious court time, which would otherwise be wasted in holding such a trial (as well as, proceedings arising therefrom) specially when, it is clear that the same would not conclude in the conviction of the accused."
9. Hon'ble Apex Court in Asmathunnisa v. State of A.P. (2011) 11 SCC 259, has held as under:
"12. This Court, in a number of cases, has laid down the scope and ambit of the High Court's power under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Inherent power under section 482 Cr.P.C. though wide have to be exercised sparingly, carefully and with great caution and only when such exercise is justified 9 by the tests specifically laid down in this section itself. Authority of the court exists for the advancement of justice. If any abuse of the process leading to injustice is brought to the notice of the court, ::: Downloaded on - 31/05/2023 20:30:49 :::CIS 10 then the Court would be justified in preventing injustice by .
invoking inherent powers in absence of specific provisions in the Statute.
13. The law has been crystallized more than half a century ago in the case of R.P. Kapur v. State of Punjab AIR 1960 SC 866 wherein this Court has summarized some categories of cases where inherent power can and should be exercised to quash the proceedings. This Court summarized the following three broad categories where the High Court would be justified in exercise of its powers under section 482:
(i) where it manifestly appears that there is a legal bar against the institution or continuance of the proceedings;
(ii) where the allegations in the first information report or complaint taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not constitute the offence alleged;
(iii) where the allegations constitute an offence but there is no legal evidence adduced or the evidence adduced clearly or manifestly fails to prove the charge."
14.In Smt. Nagawwa v. Veeranna Shivalingappa Konjalgi and Others (1976) 3 SCC 736, according to the court, the process against the accused can be quashed or set aside :
"(1) where the allegations made in the complaint or the statements of the witnesses recorded in support of the same taken at their face value make out absolutely no case against the accused or the complaint does not disclose the essential ingredients of an offence which is alleged against the accused;
(2) where the allegations made in the complaint are patently absurd and inherently improbable so that no 10 prudent person can ever reach a conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused;
(3) where the d iscretion exercised 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 ::: Downloaded on - 31/05/2023 20:30:49 :::CIS 11 absence of a complaint by legally competent .
authority and the like".
15. This court in State of Karnataka v. L. Muniswamy & Others (1977) 2 SCC 699, observed that the wholesome power under section 482 Cr.P.C. entitles the High Court to quash a proceeding when it comes to the conclusion that allowing the proceedings to continue would be an abuse of the process of the court or that the ends of justice requires that the proceedings ought to be quashed. The High Courts have been invested with inherent powers, both in civil and criminal matters, to achieve a salutary public purpose. A Court proceeding ought not to be permitted to degenerate into a weapon of harassment or persecution. In this case, the court observed that ends of justice are higher than the ends of mere law though justice must be administered according to laws made by the Legislature. This case has been followed in a large number of subsequent cases of this court and other courts."
10. Hon'ble Apex Court in Asmathunnisa (supra) has categorically held that where discretion exercised 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 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, High Court would be justified in exercise of its powers under S. 482 CrPC.
11. From the bare perusal of aforesaid exposition of law, it is quite apparent that exercising its inherent power under Section 482 Cr.PC., High Court can proceed to quash the proceedings, if it comes to the conclusion ::: Downloaded on - 31/05/2023 20:30:49 :::CIS 12 that allowing the proceedings to continue would be an abuse of process of .
the law.
12. Now being guided by the aforesaid law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court from time to time, this court would make an endeavour to find out "whether FIR sought to be quashed discloses offence, if any, punishable under Sections 147, 149, 201 and 323 of IPC and evidentiary material collected on record by the prosecution is sufficient to connect the accused named in the FIR with the alleged commission of offence or not?"
13. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused material available on record, this Court finds that on the date of the alleged incident, parties, who are closely related to each other, had reached on the spot on the direction issued by the Patwari of the Patwar Circle concerned.
Patwari had summoned parties on the spot in connection with the partition proceedings pending adjudication before the Assistant Collector, First Grade, Ramshehar, District Solan. Since, on the spot, all the parties who are co-sharers started quarrelling with each other on account of septic tank allegedly constructed by one of the accused named in the FIR on the land allegedly possessed by the complainant, Patawri concerned was unable to conduct the proceedings on the spot, but he categorically stated to the police during investigation in the FIR sought to be quashed that Smt. ::: Downloaded on - 31/05/2023 20:30:49 :::CIS 13 Shakuntala Devi gave blow of Danda on the head of the complainant .
Rajinder Kumar. Patwari concerned, who was independent person available on the spot, has nowhere stated something specific with regard to beatings, if any, given by the petitioners herein. No doubt, independent witnesses associated on the spot have stated that petitioners alongwith other co-accused also participated in the quarrel and gave beatings to the complainant, but since complainant himself nowhere leveled allegation of beatings, if any, given by the petitioner coupled with the statement of Patwari concerned, there appears to be merit in the contention of the petitioners that they have been falsely implicated. If the statement of the complainant, on the basis of which FIR sought to be quashed came to be recorded, is perused, it was none of the case of the complainant that he was given beatings by the petitioners, rather he categorically named Ms. Shakuntala and Pawan. He nowhere stated that petitioners herein hurled abuses or gave any kind of beatings to him. Though learned Additional Advocate General and learned counsel for the complainant while making this court peruse statements of independent witnesses adduced on record vehemently argued that there is overwhelming evidence suggestive of the fact that petitioners not only participated in the quarrel, but also gave beatings to the complainant, however, version given by so called ::: Downloaded on - 31/05/2023 20:30:49 :::CIS 14 independent witnesses if perused in its entirety, clearly reveals that they .
had no occasion to see the quarrel with their own eyes, but yet subsequently, they deposed before the court below that accused named in the FIR gave beatings to the complainant Rajinder Kumar. The sole eye witness in the case, who had no interest of any kind in the dispute, inter-se parties is/was Patwari, who categorically stated that Ms. Shakuntla gave blow of danda on the head of the complainant. He nowhere stated that petitioner as well as other co-accused named in the FIR gave beatings, if any, to the complainant
14. Record reveals that parties to the case had not been enjoying the good relations with each other on account of civil litigation. Factual position as taken note herein above clearly reveals that genesis of the criminal proceedings in the case at hand, is nothing but the civil dispute inter-se parties. Leaving everything aside,, this court finds that there is nothing on record to prove that petitioners had come on the spot with common intention /object to give beatings to the complainant or his family members, rather they alongwith other co-sharers had reached on the spot on the direction issued by the Patwari of the concerned Patwar circle.
Since on account of unauthorized construction of septic tank, altercation took place inter-se complainant Rajinder Kumar and accused Pawan ::: Downloaded on - 31/05/2023 20:30:49 :::CIS 15 Kumar, fight started inter-se Pawan Kumar and Rajinder Kumar and .
thereafter, blow of danda on the head of Rajinder Kumar was given by Shakuntala Devi wife of Pawan Kumar. No doubt, petitioners being one of the co-sharers were also present on the spot, but definitely, there is nothing to suggest that they had any prior planning with other accused namely Pawan Kumar and Shakuntala Devi to give beatings to the complainant, rather they being co-sharer were duty bound to come present on the spot on the instructions issued by the concerned Patwari.
15. Leaving everything aside, no case much less under Section 323 of IPC is made out against the petitioners. It is specific case of the prosecution that blow of danda on the head of complainant was given by the Shakuntla. Though at this stage, learned Additional Advocate General attempted to argue that since there is overwhelming evidence available on record that petitioners alongwith co-accused had formed unlawful assembly and had common intention/object to cause injury to the complainant, petitioners are liable to be punished under Section 323 IPC, but such plea of him deserves outright rejection for the reason that there is no evidence on record suggestive of the fact that petitioners alongwith other co-accused had come prepared to give beatings to the complainant or his family members. Neither theywere carrying any kind of weapon with them nor ::: Downloaded on - 31/05/2023 20:30:49 :::CIS 16 they actually gave beatings to the complainant or his family members, .
rather they were present on the spot only on account of direction issued by the Patwari of the Patwar Circle concerned.
16. Reliance is also placed upon judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Usha Chakraborty and Anr. v. State of West Bengal and Anr, 2023 SCc OnLine SC90, relevant paras whereof read as under:
" 12. The basic requirements/ingredients to bring home the accusations under the alleged offences are hereunder:-
Offence punishable under Section 323, IPC.
(i) causation of hurt by another person; (ii) that he caused such hurt voluntarily; (iii) that such a case is not covered under Section 334, IPC.
Offence of extortion punishable under Section 384, IPC.
(i) intentionally putting a person in fear of injury to himself or another; (ii) dishonestly inducing a person so put in fear to deliver to any person any property, or valuable security.
Offence of criminal breach of trust punishable under Section 406, IPC.
(i) Entrustment of the property or any dominion over property with accusation; (ii) The person entrusted dishonestly misappropriating or converting to his own use that property; or dishonestly using or disposing that property in violation of any direction of law prescribing the mode in which such trust is to be discharged or of any legal contract, express or implied, which he has made touching the discharge of such trust or willfully causing sufferance to any other person so to do.
Offence punishable under Section 423, IPC.
The essential ingredients to constitute an offence under Section 423, IPC is that the sale deed or deed subjecting an immovable property to a charge was contained a false statement relating to the consideration or relating to the persons or whose use or benefit, it was intended to operate. Thus, it is evident that Section 423, IPC deals with twin specific frauds in the matter of ::: Downloaded on - 31/05/2023 20:30:49 :::CIS 17 execution of deeds or instruments of transfer or charge, idest, (i) false recital .
as to consideration or false recital as to the name of beneficiary.
Offence punishable under Section 467, IPC.
Virtually, the offence under Section 467 is an aggravated form of the offence under Section 466, IPC. The essential ingredients to constitute the offence punishable under this Section are (i) commission of forgery; (ii) that such commission of forgery must be in relation to a document purporting to be (a) a valuable property; or (b) a will; or (c) an authority to adopt a son; or (d) which purports to give authority to any person to make or transfer any valuable security; or (e) the receive the principle, interest or dividends thereon; or (f) to receive or deliver any money, movable property or valuable security, or any document purporting to be an acquittance or receipt acknowledging the payment of money, or (g) an acquittance or receipt for the delivery of any movable property or valuable security.
Offence punishable under Section 468, IPC.
(i) Commission of forgery, (ii) that he did so intending that the document or electronic record forged shall be used for the purpose of cheating.
Offence punishable under Section 420, IPC.
To constitute the said offence there must be deception i.e., the accused must have deceived someone; that by such deception the accused must induce a person
(i) to deliver any property; or (ii) to make, alter, destroy a whole or part of the valuable security or anything which is signed or sealed and which is capable of being converted into a valuable property; or (iii) that the accused must have done so dishonestly. The offence punishable under Section 120B, IPC, to constitute criminal conspiracy, there must be agreement between two or more persons. The agreement should be to do or cause to be done some illegal act, or some act which is not illegal, by illegal means, provided that where the agreement is other than one to commit an offence, the prosecution must further prove; or (iv) that some act besides the agreement was done by or more of the parties in pursuance of it.
13. Now, the question is whether the allegations in the aforesaid application are sufficient to constitute the alleged offences.
14. We have already extracted the said application filed by the respondent against the appellants in its entirety. At the outset, it is to be noted that in the affidavit accompanying the application, the respondent has stated thus:-
"I have not placed this incident before any Court heretofore". In the application, obviously, it is stated that he is one of the trustees of Bagla ::: Downloaded on - 31/05/2023 20:30:49 :::CIS 18 Sundari Memorial Trust at Basunagar Madhyagram and under the said .
trust there is a high school by name of Rose Bank Educare and he is the Secretary of the said school. The recital in paragraph 2 of the application filed by the respondent would reveal his case that the accused persons kept him in dark and without giving any information by strengthening the said trust deed illegally got the same registered on 12.07.2016 and removed him from the said post. It is in this context that the aforesaid statement in the aforesaid affidavit assumes relevance. It is the case of the appellants that in regard to his removal from the post of Secretary of the school, the respondent had instituted title suit No.363 of 2015, praying therein for a declaration that he is the Secretary of the school and the said suit is still pending. Despite the institution of the said suit and its pendency before the First Court of Civil Judge, Junior Division, Barasat the respondent made such a statement in the affidavit. That apart, what is stated in the application is that he is the Secretary of the school, run by the trust.
15. The materials on record pertaining to the said pleadings instituted in the Civil Suit, produced in this proceeding would reveal that the respondent was in fact ousted from the membership of the trust. In the counter affidavit filed in this proceeding, the respondent has virtually admitted the pendency of the suit filed against his removal from the post of Secretary and the trusteeship and its pendency. The factum of passing of adverse orders in the interlocutory applications in the said Civil Suit as also the prima facie finding and conclusion arrived at by the Civil Court that the respondent stands removed from the post of Secretary and also from the trusteeship are also not disputed therein. Then, the question is why would the respondent conceal those relevant aspects? The indisputable and undisputed facts (admitted in the counter-affidavit by the respondent) would reveal the existence of the civil dispute on removal of the respondent from the post of Secretary of the school as also from the trusteeship. Obviously, it can only be taken that since the removal from the office of the Secretary and the trusteeship was the causative incident, he concealed the pendency of the civil suit to cover up the civil nature of the dispute.
16. By non-disclosure the respondent has, in troth, concealed the existence of a pending civil suit between him and the appellants herein before a competent civil court which obviously is the causative incident for the respondent's allegation of perpetration of the aforesaid offences against the appellants. We will deal with it further and also its impact a little later. There cannot be any doubt with respect to the position that in order to cause registration of an F.I.R. and consequential investigation based on the same the petition filed under Section 156(3), Cr.P.C., must satisfy the essential ingredients to attract the alleged offences. In other words, if such allegations in the petition are vague and are not specific with respect to the alleged offences it cannot lead to an order for registration of an F.I.R. and investigation on the accusation of commission of the offences alleged. As noticed hereinbefore, the respondent alleged commission of offences under Sections 323, 384, 406, 423, 467, 468, 420 and 120B, IPC against ::: Downloaded on - 31/05/2023 20:30:49 :::CIS 19 the appellants. A bare perusal of the said allegation and the ingredients to .
attract them, as adverted to hereinbefore would reveal that the allegations are vague and they did not carry the essential ingredients to constitute the alleged offences. There is absolutely no allegation in the complaint that the appellants herein had caused hurt on the respondent so also, they did not reveal a case that the appellants had intentionally put the respondent in fear of injury either to himself or another or by putting him under such fear or injury, dishonestly induced him to deliver any property or valuable security. The same is the position with respect to the alleged offences punishable under Sections 406, 423, 467, 468, 420 and 120 B, IPC. The ingredients to attract the alleged offence referred to hereinbefore and the nature of the allegations contained in the application filed by the respondent would undoubtedly make it clear that the respondent had failed to make specific allegation against the appellants herein in respect of the aforesaid offences. The factual position thus would reveal that the genesis as also the purpose of criminal proceedings are nothing but the aforesaid incident and further that the dispute involved is essentially of civil nature. The appellants and the respondents have given a cloak of criminal offence in the issue. In such circumstance when the respondent had already resorted to the available civil remedy and it is pending, going by the decision in Paramjit Batra (supra), the High Court would have quashed the criminal proceedings to prevent the abuse of the process of the Court but for the concealment.
17. In the aforesaid circumstances, coupled with the fact that in respect of the issue involved, which is of civil nature, the respondent had already approached the jurisdictional civil court by instituting a civil suit and it is pending, there can be no doubt with respect to the fact that the attempt on the part of the respondent is to use the criminal proceedings as weapon of harassment against the appellants. The indisputable facts that the respondent has filed the pending title suit in the year 2015, he got no case that he obtained an interim relief against his removal from the office of Secretary of the School Managing Committee as also the trusteeship, that he filed the stated application for an order for investigation only in April, 2017 together with absence of a case that despite such removal he got a right to get informed of the affairs of the school and also the trust, would only support the said conclusion. For all these reasons, we are of the considered view that this case invites invocation of the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the FIR registered based on the direction of the Magistrate Court in the afore-stated application and all further proceeding in pursuance thereof. Also, we have no hesitation to hold that permitting continuance of the criminal proceedings against the appellants in the aforesaid circumstances would result in abuse of the process of Court and also in miscarriage of justice.
18. In the result, the registration of FIR No.189 of 2017 dated 11.04.2017 at Madhyagram Police Station against the appellants herein and all further proceeding based on the same qua the appellants are quashed and set aside."
::: Downloaded on - 31/05/2023 20:30:49 :::CIS 2017. In view of the detailed discussion made herein above and law .
taken into consideration, there appears to be sufficient ground for this Court to exercise its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C, for quashing of FIR and consequent criminal proceedings against the petitioners, to prevent abuse of process of law and to prevent unnecessary harassment to the petitioners against whom there is no evidence to connect them with the commission of offences as incorporated in the FIR. Otherwise also, continuance of the criminal proceedings against the petitioners in the present case would be a sheer wastage of time of the learned trial Court and the same would amount to subjecting the petitioners to unnecessary and protracted ordeal of trial, which is bound to culminate in acquittal. If the evidentiary material collected on record to prove the guilt of the petitioners is perused in its entirety, this is no sufficient material to connect the petitioners with the offence alleged to have been committed by them. To the contrary if on the basis of material adduced on record by the investigating agency, trial is allowed to continue, great prejudice would be caused to the petitioners and same would amount to sheer abuse of process of law.
18. Consequently, in view of the detailed discussion made herein above as well as law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court, this Court finds ::: Downloaded on - 31/05/2023 20:30:49 :::CIS 21 merit in the present petition and as such same is allowed and FIR No. 9 of .
2022 dated 10.2.2022, under Sections 147, 149, 201 and 323 of IPC, registered at PS Ramshahar, Police District Baddi, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh, as well as consequent proceedings/trial pending adjudication in Case No. 125/2 of 2022, State v. Pawan, before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Nalagarh, District Solan, H.P., qua the petitioners, are hereby quashed and set-aside. Accordingly, present petition is disposed of, so also pending applications, if any.
May 29, 2023
r (Sandeep Sharma),
(manjit) Judge
::: Downloaded on - 31/05/2023 20:30:49 :::CIS