S.482 CrPC | Criminal Antecedents Of Accused Cannot Be The Sole Consideration To Decline To Quash Criminal Proceedings: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court observed that the criminal antecedents of the accused cannot be the sole consideration to decline to quash the criminal proceedings."An accused has a legitimate right to say before the Court that howsoever bad his antecedents may be, still if the FIR fails to disclose commission of any offence or his case falls within one of the parameters as laid down by this Court in the case of Bhajan Lal (supra), then the Court should not decline to quash the criminal case only on the ground that the accused is a history sheeter.", the bench of Justices B R Gavai and J B Pardiwala observed.In this case, an FIR was lodged against the accused alleging offences punishable under Sections 395, 504, 506 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). As the Allahabad High Court declined to quash criminal proceedings/FIR, the accused approached the Apex Court.The court, referring to the allegations levelled, noted that the entire case put up by the first informant on the face of it appears to be concocted and fabricated. It was further noted that the FIR, was lodged after a period of more than one year without disclosing the date and time of the alleged incident.The court thereafter considered the submission of the Additional Advocate General appearing for the State that considering the gross criminal antecedents of the accused, the criminal proceedings may not be quashed. The court observed thus:"A bare look at the chart may give an impression that the appellants are history sheeters and hardened criminals. However, when it comes to quashing of the FIR or criminal proceedings, the criminal antecedents of the accused cannot be the sole consideration to decline to quash the criminal proceedings. An accused has a legitimate right to say before the Court that howsoever bad his antecedents may be, still if the FIR fails to disclose commission of any offence or his case falls within one of the parameters as laid down by this Court in the case of Bhajan Lal (supra), then the Court should not decline to quash the criminal case only on the ground that the accused is a history sheeter. Initiation of prosecution has adverse and harsh consequences for the persons named as accused. In Directorate of Revenue and another v. Mohammed Nisar Holia, (2008) 2 SCC 370, this Court explicitly recognises the right to not to be disturbed without sufficient grounds as one of the underlying mandates of Article 21 of the Constitution. Thus, the requirement and need to balance the law enforcement power and protection of citizens from injustice and harassment must be maintained. It goes without saying that the State owes a duty to ensure that no crime goes unpunished but at the same time it also owes a duty to ensure that none of its subjects are unnecessarily harassed."Thus, the court allowed the appeal and quashed the criminal proceedings against the accused.Mohammad Wajid vs State of U P | 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 624 | 2023 INSC 683Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ; Section 482 - When it comes to quashing of the FIR or criminal proceedings, the criminal antecedents of the accused cannot be the sole consideration to decline to quash the criminal proceedings. An accused has a legitimate right to say before the Court that howsoever bad his antecedents may be, still if the FIR fails to disclose commission of any offence or his case falls within one of the parameters as laid down by this Court in the case of Bhajan Lal, then the Court should not decline to quash the criminal case only on the ground that the accused is a history sheeter. Initiation of prosecution has adverse and harsh consequences for the persons named as accused - The right to not to be disturbed without sufficient grounds as one of the underlying mandates of Article 21 of the Constitution - The requirement and need to balance the law enforcement power and protection of citizens from injustice and harassment must be maintained. It goes without saying that the State owes a duty to ensure that no crime goes unpunished but at the same time it also owes a duty to ensure that none of its subjects are unnecessarily harassed. (Para 34)Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ; Section 482 - Delay in the registration of the FIR, by itself, cannot be a ground for quashing of the FIR. However, delay with other attending circumstances emerging from the record of the case rendering the entire case put up by the prosecution inherently improbable, may at times become a good ground to quash the FIR and consequential proceedings. (Para 33)Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ; Section 482 - Whenever an accused comes before the Court invoking either the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) or extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution to get the FIR or the criminal proceedings quashed essentially on the ground that such proceedings are manifestly frivolous or vexatious or instituted with the ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance, then in such...

S.482 CrPC | Criminal Antecedents Of Accused Cannot Be The Sole Consideration To Decline To Quash Criminal Proceedings: Supreme Court

Ashok KM

Tags