Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 6 of 6 (0.23 seconds)Section 482 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 109 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
State Of Haryana And Ors vs Ch. Bhajan Lal And Ors on 21 November, 1990
The learned counsel for the appellant contended before
us that the High Court in exercising the jurisdiction under
section 482, Cr.P.C., has made a probe into the truthfulness
of the allegations made and proceeded to analyse the
evidence which could be produced in support of the
allegations and in so doing had overlooked the well-settled
principle laid down for guidance while exercising the
inherent power. According to the appellant, the learned
magistrate has taken congnizane of the complainant on the
basis of the allegations made which clearly reveal the
commission of an offence. The materials produced by the
complainant to satisfy the magistrate at the initial stage
has been duly considered before issuing process and the
question whether the case would result in conviction or not
is not a matter for consideration at that stage and there
was, therefore, no justification for the High Court to quash
the proceedings relying on the materials which have not been
legally proved. It is vehementaly contended that the copy
of the first information report filed before the court is
not genuine, that the witness Vijay Bharti had filed an
affidavit before this Court denying the genuineness of the
affidavit stated to have been filed before the High Court
and in this state of the facts it was pre-nature to conclude
that it would be an abuse of the process of the court to
proceed with the complaint. The learned counsel has also
relied on the decision of this Court in State of Haryana and
Ors. v. Ch. Bhajan Lal and Ors., JT [1990] 4 SC 650.
State Of Bihar vs Murad Ali Khan, Farukh Salauddin & ... on 10 October, 1988
The High Court, relying on the decision of this Court
in State of Bihar v. Murad Ali Khan, AIR 1989 SC 1, pointed
out that when the High Court is called upon to exercise the
jurisdiction to quash a proceeding at the stage of the
magistrate taking cognizance of an offence, the High Court
is guided by the allegations whether those allegations set
out in the complaint or the charge-sheet do not in law
constitute or spell out any offence and that resort to
criminal proceedings within the circumstances amount to an
abuse of the process of the court or not. The High Court,
has however, in approaching the question misdirected itself
in analysing the truth or otherwise of the allegations on
the basis of the materials which could not be relied on
without legal proof. It is not disputed that the complaint
filed by the appellant does disclose an offence under
section 494, I.P.C. The allegations made by the complainant
in law constitute and spell out an offence. If so, the only
question that could have been considered at this stage is
whether the continuance of the proceedings would be an abuse
of the process of the court. This court has in various
decisions examined the scope of the power under section 482,
Cr.P.C., and has reiterated the principle that the High
Court can exercise its inherent jurisdiction of quashing a
criminal proceedings only when the allegations made in the
complaint do not constitute an offence or that the exercise
of the power is necessary either to prevent the abuse of
the process of the court or otherwise to secure to ends of
justice. No inflexible quidelines or rigid foumula can be
set out and it depends upon the facts and circumstances of
each case wherein such power should be exercised. When the
allegations in the complaint prima facie constitute the
offence against any or all of the respondents in the absence
of materials on record to show that the continuance of the
proceedings would be an abuse of the process of the court or
would defeat the ends of justice, the High Court would not
be justified in quashing the complaint.
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
1