Penal Code, 1860 – s.420 – Ingredients – s.420 when not attracted:
Held: For attracting the provision of s.420, IPC, the FIR/complaint must show that the ingredients of s.415, IPC are made out – It must be shown that the FIR/complaint discloses the deception of any person; fraudulently or dishonestly inducing that person to deliver any property to any person; and dishonest intention of the accused at the time of making the inducement – In the present case, no role of inducement at all has been attributed to the appellant – Allegations w.r.t inducement are only against accused Nos.1 and 2 – Rather, from the perusal of the FIR and the charge-sheet, it would reveal that there was no transaction of any nature directly between the appellant and the complainant – FIR or the charge-sheet, even if taken at its face value, does not disclose the ingredients to attract the provision of s.420, IPC qua the appellant – Dishonest inducement is the sine qua non to attract the provisions of ss.415 and 420 of IPC and the same is totally lacking qua the appellant – In that view of the matter, continuation of the criminal proceedings against the appellant would be nothing else but amount to abuse of process of law resulting in miscarriage of justice – Impugned orders and the FIR alongwith the chargesheet filed against the appellant, quashed and set aside. [Paras 13, 15, 19, 20 and 24]
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.482 – Exercise of jurisdiction under – Discussed.
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.482 – FIR registered against appellant u/s.420 r/w s.34, Penal Code, 1860 – High Court rejected the petition filed by the appellant u/s.482 – Present appeal filed – Contention of the respondents that since the charge-sheet has been filed, the present appeal is liable to be dismissed:
Held: Said contention has no merit – As rightly held in Anand Kumar Mohatta and Another v. State (NCT of Delhi), Department of Home and Another, [2018] 13 SCR 1028, there is nothing in the words of this section which restricts the exercise of the power of the Court to prevent the abuse of process of court or miscarriage of justice only to the stage of the FIR – High Court can exercise jurisdiction u/s.482 CrPC even when the discharge application is pending with the trial court – Indeed, it would be a travesty to hold that proceedings initiated against a person can be interfered with at the stage of FIR but not if it has advanced and the allegations have materialised into a charge-sheet – On the contrary it could be said that the abuse of process caused by FIR stands aggravated if the FIR has taken the form of a charge-sheet after investigation – The power is undoubtedly conferred to prevent abuse of process of power of any court. [Paras 21, 23]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.