TMI Blog2005 (12) TMI 597X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The Court is not required to appreciate evidence to conclude whether the materials produced are sufficient or not for convicting the accused. In Chand Dhawan (Smt.) v. Jawahar Lal and Ors. [ 1992 (4) TMI 254 - SUPREME COURT] , it was observed that when the materials relied upon by a party are required to be proved, no inference can be drawn on the basis of those materials to conclude the complaint to be unacceptable. The Court should not act on annexures to the petitions u/s 482 of the CrPC., which cannot be termed as evidence without being tested and proved. Learned Single Judges did not keep in view the correct position in law while allowing the petitions filed by the respondents. It baffles us as to how a learned Single Judge while exercising powers u/s 482 CrPC could even direct grant of renewal of licence. It is somewhat akin to a learned Single Judge of another High Court directing creation of criminal courts to deal with cases under a particular statute. It is baffling how learned Single Judge referred to submissions purportedly made by learned Counsel for Bichitrananda who was not even a party. It is not clear how such submissions if any could be made. The conclusions are ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gistered in which respondent Saroj Kumar Sahoo was the Chairman cum Managing Trustee. It appears that a registered sale deed No. 386 dated 4.3.1997 was registered before Sub Registrar, Pipli in respect of about 10 acres of land. According to the prosecution on 14.1.1997 the respondent Saroj Kumar Sahoo in the capacity of Chairman cum Managing Trustee of Nabaprabhat Trust applied for establishment of a new polytechnic with approval of All India Council for Technical Education (in short 'AICTE'), though the trust was not having the requisite land of 20 acres and funds to the tune of ₹ 25 lakhs as the trust was registered with a corpus of a paltry sum i.e. ₹ 10,000/-. Xerox copy of the sale deed according to the prosecution was submitted to the Director, Technical Education and Training, Orissa for establishment of technical education institution. The respondent, got land and shed on the pretext of using the lands and sheds for bona fide industrial use in the Mancheswar Industrial Estate. 4. On 25.6.1997 approval for running the technical education institutions was accorded. On 26.7.1997 the respondent Saroj Kumar Sahoo along with Smt. Sukanti Muduli, (mother of Sh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the proceedings relating to Bhubneshwar Vigilance Police Station Case No. 43 of 2000. In the said allegations which were against respondent Nalinikanta and his father Muduli (in short 'Bichitrananda') Bhubneshwar Vigilance PS case No. 25 of 2000 was registered against Bichitrananda on the allegation that he had acquired assets disproportionate to his known sources of income. During investigation business premises of Nalinikanta were searched and incriminating materials/documents were seized for which FIR No. 43 of 2000 was lodged against Nalinikanta and Bichitrananda. In the appeal relatable to SLP (Crl.) 3199 of 2004, the challenge . before the High Court was to the FIR 61 of 2000. In these cases, learned Single Judge exercised power under Section 482 and gave certain directions which shall be dealt with infra. 6. Learned Counsel for the appellant-State submitted that the scope and ambit of Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been analysed in various cases. The power is to be exercised sparingly and not in the manner done in the present cases. In Criminal Appeal No. 920 of 2003 the High Court interfered at a stage when investigation was not even over. Similar is the appeal relating ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntire records came to hold that an innocent person like Bichitrananda should not be penalized and, therefore, quashed the proceedings so far as he is concerned. Without making him a party in these proceedings the appellants cannot take away the relief granted to him by learned Single Judge. 8. Exercise of power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. in a case of this nature is the exception and not the rule. The Section does not confer any new powers on the High Court. It only saves the inherent power which the Court possessed before the enactment of the Cr.P.C. It envisages three circumstances under which the inherent jurisdiction may be exercised, namely, (i) to give effect to an order under the Cr.P.C., (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of court, and (iii) to otherwise secure the ends of justice. It is neither possible nor desirable to lay down any inflexible rule which would govern the exercise of inherent jurisdiction. No legislative enactment dealing with procedure can provide for all cases that may possibly arise. Courts, therefore, have inherent powers apart from express provisions of law which are necessary for proper discharge of functions and duties imposed upon them by law ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or the evidence adduced clearly or manifestly fails to prove the charge. 10. In dealing with the last category, it is important to bear in mind the distinction between a case where there is no legal evidence or where there is evidence which is clearly inconsistent with the accusations made, and a case where there is legal evidence which, on appreciation, may or may not support the accusations. When exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., the High Court would not ordinarily embark upon an enquiry whether the evidence in question is reliable or not or whether on a reasonable appreciation of it accusation would not be sustained. That is the function of the trial Judge. Judicial process should not be an instrument of oppression, or, needless harassment. Court should be circumspect and judicious in exercising discretion and should take all relevant facts and circumstances into consideration before issuing process, lest it would be an instrument in the hands of a private complainant to unleash vendetta to harass any person needlessly. At the same time the section is not an instrument handed over to an accused to short-circuit a prosecution and bring about its sudden dea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rsonal grudge. 11. As noted above, the powers possessed by the High Court under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. are very wide and the very plenitude of the power requires great caution in its exercise. Court must be careful to see that its decision in exercise of this power is based on sound principles. The inherent power should not be exercised to stifle a legitimate prosecution. The High Court being the highest court of a State should normally refrain from giving a prima facie decision in a case where the entire facts are incomplete and hazy, more so when the evidence has not been collected and produced before the Court and the issues involved, whether factual or legal, are of magnitude and cannot be seen in their true perspective without sufficient material. Of course, no hard and fast rule can be laid down in regard to cases in which the High Court will exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction of quashing the proceeding at any stage. (See: Janata Dal v. H.S. Chowdhary 1993CriLJ600, and Raghubir Saran (Dr.) v. State of Bihar 1964CriLJ1 . It would not be proper for the High Court to analyse the case of the complainant in the light of all probabilities in order to determine whether a co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., it is not permissible for the Court to act as if it was a trial Court. Even when charge is framed at that stage, the Court has to only prima facie be satisfied about existence of sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused. For that limited purpose, the Court can evaluate material and documents on records but it cannot appreciate evidence. The Court is not required to appreciate evidence to conclude whether the materials produced are sufficient or not for convicting the accused. In Chand Dhawan (Smt.) v. Jawahar Lal and Ors. 1992CriLJ1956, it was observed that when the materials relied upon by a party are required to be proved, no inference can be drawn on the basis of those materials to conclude the complaint to be unacceptable. The Court should not act on annexures to the petitions under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., which cannot be termed as evidence without being tested and proved. 15. Learned Single Judges did not keep in view the correct position in law while allowing the petitions filed by the respondents. It baffles us as to how a learned Single Judge while exercising powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. could even direct grant of renewal of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
