Quashing – Parties made allegations against each other of taking money for providing a job – Respondent no.6 filed FIR against the appellant – High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellant for quashing the criminal proceedings – Correctness:
Held: In the complaint made by the appellant in 2021 an enquiry was made in which the fact that the respondent no.6 had stated that she had paid Rs.4 lacs to the appellant for providing a job to her daughter was recorded – Thus, respondent no.6 was well aware of the complaint made by the appellant and thus cannot raise a plea that she had no knowledge of the complaint made by the appellant – Despite the same she did not lodge any complaint against the appellant and his brother and waited for more than a year to lodge the FIR in July, 2022 – According to the allegations made in the FIR, the job was to be provided by the appellant within three months of April, 2019 i.e. by July, 2019 – However, the respondent no.6 did not take any action for a period of three years till July, 2022 when the FIR in question was lodged – Thus, the FIR suffers from a serious unexplained delay of three years – Furthermore, there was totally an unlawful contract between the parties where money was paid for securing job in the government department/private sector – Apparently, a suit for recovery could not have been filed for the said purpose and even if it could be filed, it could be difficult to establish the same where the payment was entirely in cash – Therefore, the respondent no.6 found out a better medium to recover the said amount by building pressure on the appellant and his brother by lodging the FIR – FIR lodged not for criminal prosecution and for punishing the offender for the offence committed but for recovery of money under coercion and pressure – Impugned order set aside, proceeding arising out of FIR in question quashed. [Paras 11-14, 16, 17] Administration of Justice – Abuse of process of law– Parties made allegations against each other of taking money for providing a job and making false complaints – Police to exercise heightened caution:
Held: Police should exercise heightened caution when drawn into dispute pertaining to such unethical transactions between private parties which appear to be prima facie contentious in light of previous inquiries or investigations – The need for vigilance on the part of the police is paramount. [Para 15]
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.