TMI Blog2021 (7) TMI 818X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... High Court should be loath in exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 of Code to enter into the process of determining the veracity of complaint. The Apex Court in case of Rajiv Thapar vs. Madan Lal Kapoor [ 2013 (1) TMI 932 - SUPREME COURT] where it was held that the powers vested in the High Court under Section 482 of 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. This is a case which cannot be said to be one where extraordinary power require to be exercised as basic ingredients of the alleged offences are there - petition is devoid of merits and is dismissed. - APPLICATION U/S 482 No. 6747 of 2021 - - - Dated:- 2-7-2021 - Hon'ble Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker , J. For the Applicant : Deepak Kumar Jaiswal,Sanjay Kumar Gupta For the Opposite Party : G. A. ORDER Hon'ble Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d on 19.11.2018; Complaint U/S 138 N.I. Act, was filed by Bank of India through Chief Manager which was registered as Criminal Complaint No.1860 of 2019 (old No. 1057 of 2019); statement of complainant, Chief Manager U/s 200 Cr.P.C. in the form of affidavit was recorded; the summoning order was never challenged before this Court. 6. The averments and complaint by the complainant will also not permit this Court to exercise jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. I am fortified in my view by the decision rendered in State of Telangana Vs. Habib Abdullah Jeelani and others, (2017) 2 SCC 799. There are serious allegations against the accused. Therefore it cannot be said that this is a case which requires to be entertained. The Court as per the contours of Section 482 Cr.P.C. cannot grant indirectly which cannot be granted directly. I am even fortified in my view by the decision rendered in Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Maharashtra AIR 2021 SC 1918. 7. At the stage the High Court is not justified in embarking upon an enquiry as to the probability, reliability or genuineness of the allegations made therein. Of course it has been pointed out in Bhajan Lal cases, 199 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... On the touchstone of the decision of the Apex Court and in a recent decision of High Court of Gujarat in case of A. H. Patel vs. State of Gujarat reported in 2014 (1) GLR 766 as the facts are similar to this case the said decision and the parameters fixed in the recent decision has holding that if the relevant aspects deserves to be investigated, the same cannot be circumvented under Section 482 of the Code. 13. The Apex Court in case of State of Orissa vs. Ujjal Kumar Burdhan reported in 2012 (1) GLH 875 (SC) has observed that: 7. It is true that the inherent powers vested in the High Court under Section 482 of the Code are very wide. Nevertheless, inherent powers do not confer arbitrary jurisdiction on the High Court to act according to whims or caprice. This extraordinary power has to be exercised sparingly with circumspection and as far as possible, for extraordinary cases, where allegations in the complaint or the first information report, taken on its face value and accepted in their entirety do not constitute the offence alleged. It needs little emphasis that unless a case of gross abuse of power is made out against those incharge of investigation, the High Court sh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... an Lal Kapoor reported in AIR 2013 (3) SCC 330 has held that : 29. The issue being examined in the instant case is the jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 482 CrPC, 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 CrPC, at the stages referred to hereinabove, would have farreaching 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 Section 482 CrPC 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 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vid-19 as officers of such institutions after falling to appear before the Court below have come up with this challenge which is a belated challenge filed after a period of two years. They have purposefully not appeared before the Court below. The summoning order was issued on 28.04.2019. All these facts which the applicants have mentioned herein, they could have mentioned before the Court below after appearing before the Court below. 19. From these factual data, it is submitted that two proceedings cannot simultaneously be proceeded. All these are in the realms evidence. The liabilities were prima facie there and therefore it cannot be said that the issuance of summons is bad. The amount of cheque and and contours of Section 138 of N.I. Act, cannot be said to have been prima faice not made out. The summoning order cumulated into bailable and non-bailable warrants. The grounds urge and the annexures annexed cannot be perused under Section 482 Cr.P.C. when prima facie case is made out. 20. It cannot be said that the complaint bared by SARFAESI Act, 2002. If it was against the O.T.S., the O.T.S. is not bounty but there a meritorious for liability and therefore both the proceedings ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
