Section 482 CrPC- Important Supreme Court & High Court Judgments of 2023

Sec 482 CrPC | Pendency Of Suit Concealed, Cloak Of Criminal Offence Given To Civil Dispute : Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Proceedings

Case Title: Usha Chakraborty & Anr. Versus State of West Bengal & Anr., 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 67

Coram: Justices Ajay Rastogi and CT Ravikumar

The Supreme Court held that criminal proceedings can be quashed in exercise of powers under Section 482 CrPC when it is found that the attempt was to give a "cloak of criminal offence" to a dispute which is essentially of civil nature.

The Court quashed the criminal proceedings after noting that the application filed under Section 156(3), Cr.P.C did not satisfy the essential ingredients to attract the alleged offences and that they were vague. Also, the existence of a pending civil dispute on the causative incident was not disclosed in the application.

High Court Cannot Quash Criminal Proceedings At Section 482 CrPC Stage By Saying Charges Aren't Proved: Supreme Court

Case Title: Central Bureau of Investigation vs Aryan Singh., 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 292

Coram: Justices MR Shah and CT Ravikumar

The Supreme Court reiterated that a High Court cannot conduct a “mini trial” while exercising powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

“At the stage of discharge and/or while exercising the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the Court has a very limited jurisdiction and is required to consider “whether any sufficient material is available to proceed further against the accused for which the accused is required to be tried or not”., the Court explained.

'Unexplained Inordinate Delay Crucial Factor To Quash Complaint' : Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Case Against ISKCON Bangalore Leaders

Case Title: Chanchalapati Das vs State of West Bengal and Madhupandit Das vs State of West Bengal., 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 446

Coram: Justices Ajay Rastogi and Bela Trivedi

The Supreme Court, while deciding an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C, quashed a criminal case against the President and Vice President of the International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON), Bengaluru, Madhu Pandit Dasa and Chanchalapati Dasa respectively, which was lodged at the instance of ISKCON Kolkata.

The Court noted that the complaint in the case was filed in 2009, almost eight years after the alleged theft of the bus took place in 2001. Thus, the Court opined that the “inordinate delay of eight years in filing the complaint in the court itself would be a sufficient ground to quash the proceeding”.

Magistrate's Order Under Section 14 SARFAESI Act Cannot Be Quashed By High Court U/S 482 CrPC : Supreme Court

Case Title: Phoenix Arc Private Limited vs V. Ganesh Murthy., 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 513

Coram: Justice AS Bopanna and MM Sundresh

The Supreme Court held that an order under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act cannot be quashed under Section 482 of the Cr.PC as such remedy can be availed only under the SARFAESI Act.

Accused Not Filing Petition To Quash FIR/Chargesheet Has No Relevance In Deciding Bail Application : Supreme Court

Case Details: Teesta Atul Setalvad v. State of Gujarat

Coram: Justices BR Gavai, AS Bopanna and Dipankar Datta

The Supreme Court, while granting bail to human rights activist Teesta Setalvad, observed that the accused not filing an application for quashing the FRI/Chargesheet is not a relevant consideration for deciding bail application.

If such a position was to be accepted, then no bail application can be accepted unless the accused files an application for quashing the proceedings, the Apex Court had observed.

S 482 CrPC - High Court Can Try To Read In Between The Lines While Considering Plea To Quash FIR : Supreme Court

Case Title: Mahmood Ali vs State of UP., 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 613

Coram: Justices B R Gavai and J B Pardiwala

The Supreme Court observed that, a High Court, while considering a petition seeking quashing of FIR/Criminal Proceedings under Section 482 CrPC, is empowered to take into account the overall circumstances leading to the initiation/registration of the case as well as the materials collected in the course of investigation.

“In frivolous or vexatious proceedings, the Court owes a duty to look into many other attending circumstances emerging from the record of the case over and above the averments and, if need be, with due care and circumspection try to read in between the lines.,” the Court explained.

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

Case Title: Mohammad Wajid vs State of U P., 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 624

Coram: Justices B R Gavai and J B Pardiwala

The Supreme Court observed that the criminal antecedents of the accused cannot be the sole consideration to decline to quash the criminal proceedings.

The Court explained: “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 (State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, AIR 1992 SC 604), then the Court should not decline to quash the criminal case only on the ground that the accused is a history sheeter.”

When Accused Seeks To Quash FIR On Ground That It's Based On Personal Vengeance, Attendant Circumstances Must Be Looked Into : Supreme Court

Case Title: Salib @ Shalu @ Salim v. State of U P, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 618 (11 aug)

Coram: Justices B.R. Gavai and J.B. Pardiwala

The Supreme Court observed that in cases where the quashing of FIR is sought, essentially on the ground that the proceedings are based on ulterior motive for wreaking personal vengeance, “then in such circumstances the Court owes a duty to look into the FIR with care and a little more closely.”

“We say so because once the complainant decides to proceed against the accused with an ulterior motive for wreaking personal vengeance, etc., then he would ensure that the FIR/complaint is very well drafted with all the necessary pleadings.,” the Court explained.

Correctness Of Witness Statements Cannot Be Decided In Section 482 CrPC Proceedings : Supreme Court

Case Title: Manik B vs Kadapala Sreyes Reddy., 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 642

Coram: Justices B R Gavai, P S Narasimha and Prashant Kumar Mishra

The Supreme Court observed that a High Court cannot go into the correctness or otherwise of the material placed by the prosecution in the chargesheet while considering a petition seeking quashing of criminal proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

The Court also opined that the scope of interference, while quashing the proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and that too for a serious offence like Section 302 of Indian Penal Code is very limited. The Court would exercise its power to quash the proceedings only if it finds that taking the case at its face value, no case is made out at all.

HC Can Act On Section 482 Petition To Quash FIR Even If Chargesheet Has Been Filed During Its Pendency : Supreme Court

Case Title: Abhishek v. State of Madhya Pradesh., 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 731

Coram: Justice Sanjay Kumar

The Supreme Court recently clarified that the High Courts can quash an FIR even if chargesheet was filed while the petition filed under Section 482 CrPC was pending.

Second Petition Under S.482 CrPC On Grounds Available At The Time Of First Petition Not Maintainable: Supreme Court

Case Title: Bhisham Lal Verma V. State of Uttar Pradesh and another, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 935

Coram: Justices C T Ravikumar and Sanjay Kumar

The Supreme Court held that a second petition under Section 482 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 on grounds that were available for challenge even at the time of filing of the first petition would not be maintainable.

The Court observed that even though there is no absolute bar on a second petition under S. 482, such a petition would not be maintainable when the grounds for relief were available to the party at the first instance itself.

High Courts Have Duty To Quash Vexatious Criminal Prosecutions: Supreme Court

Case Title: Vishnu Kumar Shukla & Anr V. The State Of Uttar Pradesh & Anr., 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 1019

Coram: Justices Vikram Nath and Ahsanuddin Amanullah

The Supreme Court while setting aside a judgment of the Allahabad High Court which refused to discharge the accused in a criminal case, the Court underscored:

“The protection against vexatious and unwanted prosecution and from being unnecessarily dragged through a trial by melting a criminal proceeding into oblivion, either through quashing a FIR/Complaint or by allowing an appeal against an order rejecting discharge or by any other legally permissible route, as the circumstances may be, in the deserving case, is a duty cast on the High Courts".

High Court Judgments- Section 482 Of The Code of Criminal Procedure., 1973

Correctness Of Allegations In FIR To Be Tested During Trial; Not By High Court While Exercising Jurisdiction U/S 482 CrPC: Kerala High Court

Case Title: XXX & Ors. v. State of Kerala & Anr., 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 200

Coram: Justice K. Babu

The Kerala High Court reiterated the view that the High Court, while exercising its power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings, would have to proceed entirely on the basis of the allegations made in the complaint or the documents accompanying the same per se.

It is trite that the power of quashing criminal proceedings should be exercised with circumspection and that too, in the rarest of rare cases and it was not justified for this Court in embarking upon an enquiry as to the reliability or genuineness or otherwise of the allegations made in the Final report or the complaint., the Court said.

S.306 CrPC No Bar On High Court To Invoke Its Powers U/S 482 And Admit An Approver On Bail: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Tariq Ahmad Dar Vs NIA., 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 94

Coram: Justice Mohan Lal

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court reiterated that in terms of Sec 306(4) (b) CrPC bail to approver who is in custody cannot be granted, however, in an appropriate case High Court can release the approver on bail in exercise of its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC.

SC/ST Act | Application U/S 482 CrPC Against Order Of Issuance Of Summons Is Maintainable: Allahabad High Court

Case title - Devendra Yadav And 7 Others vs. State of U.P. and Another., 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 135

Coram: Justice Rahul Chaturvedi

The Allahabad High Court held that an order issuing a summons to an accused for an offence under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, can be challenged by way of filing an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

High Court Cannot Exercise Inherent Powers U/S 482 CrPC To Review Its Judgment, Embargo U/S 362 Applies: Rajasthan High Court

Case Title: Dharam Singh Meena and Anr. v. State of Rajasthan & Anr., 2023 LiveLaw (Raj) 61

Coram: Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand

The Rajasthan High Court at Jaipur reiterated that the inherent powers of the High Court under Section 482 of IPC cannot be invoked to alter or review the final order of a criminal court.

The purpose of Section 362 Cr.P.C. is that once a Court delivers a judgment or a final order disposing of a case, that judgment becomes functus officio, and it cannot be reconsidered or modified. The inherent power of the Court cannot be exercised for doing something that is specifically prohibited by the Cr.P.C. as doing so would be a violation of the law enacted by the Legislature and the precedents of the Supreme Court., the Court explained.

Petitions U/S 482 CrPC Not Maintainable For Challenging Proceedings U/S 12 Domestic Violence Act: Himachal Pradesh High Court

Case Title: Sanjeev Kumar & ors Vs Sushma Devi., 2023 LiveLaw (HP) 48

Coram: Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua

The Himachal Pradesh High Court reiterated that petitions under Section 482 CrPC are not maintainable for challenging the proceedings under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act.

It clarified that proceedings under Chapter IV of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, are of a civil nature and not criminal and emphasized that an application under Section 12 of the Act is distinct from a complaint under the Code of Criminal Procedure and should not be equated with criminal proceedings.

No Universal Rule To Acquit An 'Absconding Accused' Upon Acquittal Of Other Co-Accused: Orissa High Court

Case Title: Deepak Oram v. State of Orissa., 2023 LiveLaw (Ori) 73

Coram: Justice Savitri Ratho

The Orissa High Court, while deciding an application under Section 482 CrPC, clarified that there is no strict rule that an 'absconding accused' must be given the benefit of acquittal in case his co-accused are acquitted of the same charges.