TMI Blog2013 (3) TMI 861X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on No. 1283 of 2012 : (13)(A) Your Lordships may be pleased to quash and set aside criminal complaint being C.R. No. 1-86 of 2012 registered at Patan Taluka Police Station, Dist. Patan (at ANNEXURE-A hereto) and all further proceedings arising of the said F.I.R. 1.1. So far as third petition, i.e. Special Criminal Application No. 1535 of 2012 is concerned, the petitioner is the complainant and he has prayed, inter alia, that : 14(B) Your Lordships may be pleased to transfer the investigation in the matter arising out of F.I.R. being C.R. No. 1-86 of 2012 registered at Patan Taluka Police Station, Dist. Patan by higher authority not below the rank of District Superintendent of Police or such other investigating agency as the Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the interest of justice, equity and good conscience. With reference to the said third petition being Special Criminal Application No. 1535 of 2012, it is relevant and necessary to mention that the said petition is also taken out in connection with and with reference to the very same complaint/F.I.R., i.e. C.R. No. 1-86 of 2012 which is the subject-matter of the above-mentioned two petitions. However, it is relevant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng their signatures as witness on such false and fabricated documents. 3.1. Accused No. 1 is described as the purchaser of the land in question and accused No. 2 is described as the person who sold the land in question to accused No. 1 with help of forged and fabricated Power of Attorney allegedly granted by complainant's father and accused Nos. 3 and 4 are described as the persons who have acted as witness to the said transaction and the disputed sale-deed. 3.2. The Special Criminal Application No. 1157 of 2012 is preferred by accused No. 1, i.e. the person who is described as the purchaser and also by accused Nos. 3 and 4 who are described as witnesses, whereas the second petition, i.e. Special Criminal Application No. 1283 of 2012 is preferred by accused No. 2 in the impugned complaint who is described as the person who sold the land in question to accused No. 1. The third petition, i.e. Special Criminal Application No. 1535 of 2012 is filed by the complainant who has prayed that the investigation may be transferred to any higher authority not below the rank of District Superintendent of Police. 4. The learned Counsel for the petitioners in both petitions, Special C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... minal Application No. 1535 of 2012 also opposed the other two petition, i.e. Special Criminal Application No. 1157 of 2012 and Special Criminal Application No. 1283 of 2012. The learned Counsel for the respondent in the said two petitions (i.e. the petitioner in the third petition) relied on the reply affidavit filed by the complainant in the said two petitions being Special Criminal Application No. 1157 of 2012 and Special Criminal Application No. 1283 of 2012, wherein some of the relevant facts have been mentioned. The complainant has averred in his affidavit that : 5. I say and submit that the land in dispute was permitted to be cultivated by my maternal uncles, namely Shakrabhai Lallubhai and Mohanbhai Lallubhai. I say and submit that both of them duped my father and took illegal and improper advantage of his ignorance and illiteracy by getting up an agreement to sale in respect of the land in dispute said to have been made in favour of Mahadev Harjibhai and Amratbhai Hemabhai. I say and submit that both of them got up a Power of Attorney and other documents. I say and submit that on account of the above registered sale-deed said to have been executed by my father in favour ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the suit filed by the accused petitioners stands withdrawn. Copy of the plaint of the Regular Civil Suit No. 139 of 2010 is annexed hereto and marked as ANNEXURE-R6 to this reply. 14. I say and submit that my father has also filed Regular Civil Suit No 20 of 2012 against Amratbhai and Mahadev by for cancellation of the so-called sale-deed dated 12-1-2010, and the same is pending. Thus, in all the Regular Civil Suit Nos. 104 of 2007, 187 of 2011, 83 of 2008 and 20 of 2012 are pending for adjudication. Copy of the plaint of the Regular Civil Suit No. 20 of 2012 is annexed hereto and marked as ANNEXURE-R7 to this reply. 15. I further say and submit that even the revenue authorities have been pleased to cancel the revenue entries mutated on the basis of the so-called Power of Attorney and sale-deeds, inter alia on the ground of pendency of the civil litigation. I say and submit that the so-called Power of Attorney, in absence of being registered cannot be looked into in view of the amendment in the Registration Act, 1908. Copies of the order passed by the Mamlatdar as well as the report of the Mamlatdar are annexed hereto and marked as ANNEXURE-R8 to this reply. 16. I say a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er authority not below the rank of District Superintendent of Police may be passed. 6. I have heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and the respondent (who is petitioner in Special Criminal Application No. 1535 of 2012) and have also considered the document and material on record. 7. It is relevant to mention that the petitioners in the said two petitions, viz. Special Criminal Application No. 1157 of 2012 and Special Criminal Application No. 1283 of 2012, seek that the investigation may not be allowed to proceed and should be terminated at its threshold. The said petitioners also seek that the F.I.R./complaint may be quashed even before the investigation is completed and relevant material is collected. 7.1. The effect of the relief prayed for by the said petitioners in the two petitions, is that in absence of relevant material and even without examining as to whether there is material to support the submissions of the petitioners or not and whether the material lend any support to the complainant's allegation, this Court at this stage should record a conclusion, and that too without benefit of relevant material and should terminate the investigation. 8. Therefo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ublic and societal interest. The people and the society have a legitimate expectation that those committing offences either against an individual or the society are expeditiously brought to trial, and if found guilty, adequately punished. Therefore, while deciding a petition filed for quashing the F.I.R. or complaint or restraining the competent authority from investigating the allegations contained in the F.I.R. or complaint or for stalling the trial of the case, the High Court should be extremely careful and circumspect. If the allegations contained in the F.I.R. or complaint discloses commission of some crime, then the High Court must keep its hands off and allow the investigating agency to complete the investigation without any fetter and also refrain from passing order which may impede the trial. The High Court should not go into the merits and demerits of the allegations simply because the petitioner alleges malus animus against the author of the F.I.R. or the complainant. The High Court must also refrain from making imaginary journey in the realm of possible harassment which may be caused to the petitioner on account of investigation of the F.I.R. or complaint. Such a course ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ons in the complaint are likely to be established by evidence or not. That is the function of the trial Magistrate when the evidence comes before him. Though it is neither possible nor advisable to lay down any inflexible rules to regulate that jurisdiction, one thing, however, appears clear and it is that when the High Court is called upon to exercise this 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 would, in the circumstances, amount to an abuse of the process of the Court or not. 9. The principles which can be deduced from the observations by Hon'ble Apex Court in various decisions, are that- (a) the High Court ought not interfere with the investigation or prosecution, or should be slow, careful and circumspect where the entire facts are incomplete and hazy; (b) 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 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ged at the police station and an offence is registered, then the mala fides of the informant would be of secondary importance and the allegations of mala fides against the informant cannot by themselves be the basis for quashing the proceedings; (m) a proper investigation in the interests of justice becomes necessary to collect material for establishing the offence, and for bringing the offender to book and justice requires that a person who commits an offence has to be brought to book and must be punished for the same, however, if the Court interferes with the proper investigation in a case where an offence has been disclosed, the offence will go unpunished to the serious detriment of the welfare of the society and the cause of the justice would suffer; (n) the High Court must also refrain from making imaginary journey in the realm of possible harassment which may be caused to the petitioner on account of investigation of the F.I.R. or complaint since such a course will result in miscarriage of justice and would encourage those accused of committing crimes to repeat the same; (o) if the High Court is satisfied that the complaint does not disclose commission of any offe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nths after the sale-deed was executed, justifies proper and complete investigation. 15.1. On this count, it is relevant to note that the so-called Power of Attorney was allegedly executed on 7-1-2010 and strength of such disputed Power of Attorney, the sale-deed came to be executed on 12-1-2010, whereas the advertisement in connection with the disputed Power of Attorney was published on 25-9-2010. 15.2. In these circumstances and more particularly in absence of sufficient and proper material, it would neither be just nor proper for the Court to record any conclusion, rather it would be premature for this Court to record any conclusion. 15.3. It has been submitted that the Investigation Officer has yet to collect specimen of signature/thumb impression and only thereafter F.S.L. opinion can be called for by the Investigation Officer and further investigation can be, if required, carried out and that, therefore, in view of this Court, it would not be proper for this Court to intervene at this stage in the investigation process and to stifle to terminate at this stage. 16. Recently, in the decision in case between State of Orissa v. Ujjal Kumar Burdhan, 2012 (1) GLH 875 (SC ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s disclosed, the Court will normally not interfere with the investigation into the offence and will generally allow the investigation into the offence to be completed for collecting materials for proving the offence. (Emphasis supplied) 16.1. In the case between Dr. Monika Kumar v. State of U.P., AIR 2008 SC 2781, the Hon'ble Apex Court has observed, with regard to jurisdiction under Sec. 482, that : 30. We may reiterate and emphasise that the powers possessed by the High Court under Sec. 482 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 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e 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 Sec. 482 Cr.P.C., at the stages referred to hereinabove, would have far-reaching consequences inasmuch as it would negate the prosecution'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 Sec. 482 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 n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Code, when exercised, have far-reaching consequences, most important being the consequence that it would negate the prosecution's/complainant's case without allowing the prosecution/complainant to lead evidence, and that therefore, the exercise of the said powers should be with utmost caution, care and circumspection. 17.2. The material relied on by the accused to justify the request should be such which would rule out and displace the assertions contained in the charges levelled against the accused and it should be based on indubitable facts and of such character which would overrule the veracity of the allegations levelled by the complainant/prosecution and should be sufficient to reject and discard the accusation without necessity of recording any evidence. 17.3. When the said principles are kept in focus and are applied in present case, then it emerges that the facts and circumstances of the case presented by the petitioner to justify the request that the complaint may be quashed, are not so convincing and satisfying that may persuade the Court to terminate the investigation at its threshold and quash the complaint without allowing the investigation to be conc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... so, will have to be tried as criminal offences, even if they also amount to civil disputes. (See: G. Sagar Suri v. State of U.P., 2000 (2) SCC 636 and Indian Oil Corporation v. N.E.P.C. India Ltd., 2006 (6) SCC 736). (Emphasis supplied) 19.2. In this context, reference may also be made to the observations by Hon'ble Apex Court in Paragraph No. 9 in the decision in the case of Mahesh Choudhary v. State of Rajasthan, 2008 (4) SCALE 85, which reads thus : 9. Propositions of law which emerge from the said decision are : (1) The High Court ordinarily would not exercise its inherent jurisdiction to quash a criminal proceeding, and in particular, a First Information Report unless the allegations contained therein, even if given face value and taken to be correct in their entirety, disclosed no cognizable offence. (2) For the said purpose, the Court, save and except in very exceptional circumstances, would not look to any document relied upon by the defence. (3) Such a power should be exercised very sparingly. If the allegations made in the F.I.R. disclose commission of an offence, the Court shall not go beyond the same and pass an order in favour of the accused ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (Criminal Appeal No. 1028 of 2001 decided on 11-10-2001) this Court held that while exercising powers under Sec. 482 of the Code, the High Court should be slow in interfering with the proceedings at the initial stage and that merely because the nature of the dispute is primarily of a civil nature, the criminal prosecution cannot be quashed because in cases of forgery and fraud there is always some element of civil nature. In a case where the accused alleged that the transaction between the parties are of a civil nature and the Criminal Court cannot proceed with the complaint because the factum of document being forged was pending in the Civil Court, the Court observed : Accepting such a general proposition would be against the provisions of law inasmuch as in all cases of cheating and fraud, in the whole transaction, there is generally some element of civil nature. However, in this case, the allegations were regarding the forging of the documents and acquiring gains on the basis of such forged documents. The proceedings could not be quashed only because the respondents had filed a civil suit with respect to the aforesaid documents. In a Criminal Court, the allegations made in t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e its inherent jurisdiction to quash a criminal proceeding, and in particular, a first information report unless the allegations contained therein, even if given face-value and taken to be correct in their entirety, disclosed no cognizable offence. (b) For the said purpose the Court, save and except, in very exceptional circumstances, would not look to any document relied upon by the defence. (c) Such a power should be exercised very sparingly. If the allegations made in the F.I.R. disclose commission of an offence, the Court shall not go beyond the same and pass an order in favour of the accused to hold absence of any mens rea or actus reus. (d) If the allegation discloses a civil dispute, the same by itself may not be a ground to hold that the criminal proceedings should not be allowed to continue. (Emphasis supplied) It is worth noting that it was observed therein that one of the paramount duties of the Superior Court is to see that person who is absolutely innocent is not subjected to prosecution and humiliation on the basis of a false and wholly untenable complaint. 20. Therefore, having regard to the facts of the case and the above-quoted observations b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the time of hearing, it has not been the case even of the petitioner that until now the investigation is not carried out in impartial manner and in accordance with law. 22.6. The petition is preferred and the relief is prayed for on premature apprehension, and therefore, it does not require to be considered at this stage. 22.7. Therefore, the said third petition does not deserve to be entertained, and is consequently, rejected. In the result, for the foregoing discussion and reasons, the petitions are not accepted. The reliefs prayed for in the petitions do not deserve to be granted. Hence, the petitions are rejected. Orders accordingly. Rule discharged. At this stage, learned Advocate for the petitioners have prayed that the interim relief, which has remained in operation until now, may be continued for some more time so as to enable the petitioners to take out appropriate proceedings before the Apex Court. The request is not opposed by learned Advocate for the respondent and learned A.P.P. In view of the said request, it is directed that the interim relief, which has remained in operation until now, shall continue till 11-10-2013. - - TaxTMI - TMITax - Indian Law ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
