Penal Code, 1860 – ss.448 and 506 – Appellants had filed two civil suits, i.e. one for permanent injunction to prohibit respondent no.2 and the other for declaration of ownership of the suit property – Respondent no.2 filed an FIR u/ss.448 and
506 IPC alleging that appellants had threatened respondent no.2 to withdraw the civil suits – Appellant sought to quash criminal proceedings by filing criminal petition u/s.482 of CrPC, which was dismissed by the High Court – Correctness: Held: The allegations in the FIR are totally absurd – When respondent no.2 has not filed any suit, there is no question of appellants threatening him of dire consequences if he does not withdraw the suit – It further appears from the record that respondent no.2 is in the habit of filing false cases against the appellants and his family members – As in another criminal case No.6969 of 2007, respondent no.2 made similar allegations against the appellants and his relatives, which were found to be totally false and appellants were acquitted – Further, brother of respondent no.2 filed another criminal case, PCR No.9345 of 2009, alleging that the sale deed on basis of which the appellant claimed title was fraudulently executed – The said proceedings were quashed by the High Court – Therefore, respondent no.2 and his relatives were in habit of filing false and malicious cases against appellants on account of long-standing civil dispute pending between them – The instant case falls in the categories provided by this Court in the case of Bhajan Lal – The initiation of criminal proceedings at the instance of respondent no.2 in the present case is totally activated by mala fide, instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance and with a view to spite the appellants – Therefore, the continuation of the criminal proceedings against the appellants would be abuse of the process of law – The criminal proceedings against the appellants are hereby quashed. [Paras 16, 17, 18, 19, 22, 23, 24, 25]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Headnotes prepared by: Ankit Gyan. 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.