Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal

1. Heard Sri Alauddin Khan, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State-O.P. no.1 and Sri @@@@@, learned counsel for O.P. no.2 and perused the record.

2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant praying for quashing the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 5732 of 2016, arising out of Case Crime No. 748 of 2016, under Section 406 I.P.C., P.S. Dhanghata, District- Sant Kabir Nagar, pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Sant Kabir Nagar, as well as chargesheet dated 18.8.2016.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the first information report was lodged on 25.07.2016, in which it was alleged that the applicant happens to be the friend of son of opposite party no. 2. On 20.3.2016 the applicant gone to the house of opposite party no. 2 and told his son that he wanted to buy a motorcycle but he has not enough money. The son of opposite party no. 2 gave his wife's jewellery to the applicant. The value of the jewellery is around Rs.3,50,000/- (rupees three lac fifty thousand) and when the son of the opposite party no. 2 asked for jewellery, the applicant told that he sold the same. After investigation the chargesheet was filed on 18.8.2016 and the cognizance was taken on 25.10.2016. Statement of PW1 was recorded and the charges have been framed.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has never committed any offence as alleged against him. Further submission is that no offence against the applicant is disclosed and the court below has utterly failed to consider as no prima facie case is made out against the applicant. He also pointed out certain documents in support of his contention.

4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently oppose the application and contends that the it is highly belated petition and the charges have already been framed against the applicant. It is further submitted that the Court below has not committed any error, hence no interference is required by this Court.

5. From the perusal of material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicant(s). All the submissions made at the bar relates to the disputed question of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court.

6. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335 has laid down the guidelines under which circumstances the Court should, in its inherent power, entertain an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The guidelines are as follows:- "(i) Where the allegations made in the first information report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused. (ii) Where the allegations in the first information report and other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code. (iii) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused. (iv) Where, the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under Section 155(2) of the Code. (v) Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused. (vi) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the Act concerned (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code or the Act concerned, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party. (vii) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fides and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge."

7. Further, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra, AIR 2021 SC 1918, R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192, and lastly, Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283 has held that only those cases in which no prima facie case is made out can be considered in an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

8. The instant application does not fall under the guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the judgments mentioned above, and followed in a number of matters. Moreover, the facts as alleged cannot be said that, prima facie, no offence is made out against the applicant(s). It is only after the evidence and trial, it can be seen as to whether the offence, as alleged, has been committed or not.

9. Hence, the instant application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. cannot be entertained and is, accordingly, dismissed. Order Date :- 2.4.2025 Faridul

1. Heard Sri Alauddin Khan, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State-O.P. no.1 and Sri @@@@@, learned counsel for O.P. no.2 and perused the record.

2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant praying for quashing the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 5732 of 2016, arising out of Case Crime No. 748 of 2016, under Section 406 I.P.C., P.S. Dhanghata, District- Sant Kabir Nagar, pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Sant Kabir Nagar, as well as chargesheet dated 18.8.2016.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the first information report was lodged on 25.07.2016, in which it was alleged that the applicant happens to be the friend of son of opposite party no. 2. On 20.3.2016 the applicant gone to the house of opposite party no. 2 and told his son that he wanted to buy a motorcycle but he has not enough money. The son of opposite party no. 2 gave his wife's jewellery to the applicant. The value of the jewellery is around Rs.3,50,000/- (rupees three lac fifty thousand) and when the son of the opposite party no. 2 asked for jewellery, the applicant told that he sold the same. After investigation the chargesheet was filed on 18.8.2016 and the cognizance was taken on 25.10.2016. Statement of PW1 was recorded and the charges have been framed.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has never committed any offence as alleged against him. Further submission is that no offence against the applicant is disclosed and the court below has utterly failed to consider as no prima facie case is made out against the applicant. He also pointed out certain documents in support of his contention.

4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently oppose the application and contends that the it is highly belated petition and the charges have already been framed against the applicant. It is further submitted that the Court below has not committed any error, hence no interference is required by this Court.

5. From the perusal of material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicant(s). All the submissions made at the bar relates to the disputed question of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court.

6. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335 has laid down the guidelines under which circumstances the Court should, in its inherent power, entertain an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The guidelines are as follows:- "(i) Where the allegations made in the first information report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused. (ii) Where the allegations in the first information report and other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code. (iii) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused. (iv) Where, the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under Section 155(2) of the Code. (v) Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused. (vi) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the Act concerned (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code or the Act concerned, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party. (vii) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fides and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge."

7. Further, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra, AIR 2021 SC 1918, R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192, and lastly, Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283 has held that only those cases in which no prima facie case is made out can be considered in an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

8. The instant application does not fall under the guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the judgments mentioned above, and followed in a number of matters. Moreover, the facts as alleged cannot be said that, prima facie, no offence is made out against the applicant(s). It is only after the evidence and trial, it can be seen as to whether the offence, as alleged, has been committed or not.

9. Hence, the instant application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. cannot be entertained and is, accordingly, dismissed. Order Date :- 2.4.2025 Faridul