SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Amit Tirpathi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 26 July, 2018

1
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
M.Cr.C No. 4022/2015
(Shri Amit Tripathi Ors. Vs. The State of M.P. ors.)

Gwalior, Dated 26/7/18
None appears for the parties.
Lawyers are abstaining from work.
1. The inherent powers of the court u/S. 482 Cr.P.C. are
invoked seeking quashment of FIR dated 11/4/15 bearing
crime No. 128/15 registered at Police Station Jhansi Road
District Gwalior alleging offences punishable u/Ss. 384,
420, 467, 468, 471 and 120 B of IPC.
2. Record is perused.
3. The FIR lodged by the prosecutrix/respondent No.2

alleges that she resides with her father in Vijyanagar Palace
campus and she knew accused Amit Tripathi who was
pursuing his academic career at Jiwaji University.
Prosecutrix further alleges that six months back the said
accused Amit Tripathi met her at Chetakpuri Petrol Pump
and threatened her that he would not allow the marriage
proposal of the prosecutrix with other person to turn into
reality. The prosecutrix was scared and therefore, disclosed
the said incident to his family members after few days. The
father of the prosecutrix then talked with family members
of co-accused Amit (Yogesh Tripathi, Smt. Sudha Tripathi,
Dimple Balothia and Shri Gautam Balothia who are all
accused in the case). These family members it is alleged in
the FIR did not pay any heed to the objections made by
the father of the prosecutrix. It is further alleged that these
co-accused (family members of accused Amit) threatened
the father of the prosecutrix of dire consequences if the
2
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
M.Cr.C No. 4022/2015
(Shri Amit Tripathi Ors. Vs. The State of M.P. ors.)

marriage of the prosecutrix is materialized with any person
other than accused Amit. In January/February-2015, the
father of the prosecutrix was invited by the accused. The
accused demanded Rs. 20 Lakhs from the father of
prosecutrix with the threat that if the demand is not met,
they would not allow the marriage of the prosecutrix to
take place. The FIR further alleges that in the premises of
the high court immediately after the proceedings in W.P.
No. 1357/15 (writ petition seeking issuance of writ of
habeas corpus) falsely filed by the accused against the
father of prosecutrix, similar threat was extended. FIR
lastly states that the threats of similar nature continued to
be extended by accused against the prosecutrix and her
family members and that false and forged documents were
also prepared by exercise of fraud and conspiracy to
blackmail the prosecutrix and her family members.

4. The material on record does not reflect that any
chargesheet has been filed till date.

5. The offences alleged by the prosecution in FIR are
u/Ss. 384, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of IPC.
5.1 The first offence is u/S. 384 of IPC which relates to
extortion defined in section 383 of IPC which is reproduced
below for ready reference and convenience.

“Extortion.–Whoever intentionally puts any
person in fear of any injury to that person, or to
any other, and thereby dishonestly induces the
person so put in fear to deliver to any person any
property or valuable security, or anything signed
or sealed which may be converted into a valuable
security, commits “extortion”. Illustrations
3
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
M.Cr.C No. 4022/2015
(Shri Amit Tripathi Ors. Vs. The State of M.P. ors.)

(a) A threatens to publish a defamatory libel
concerning Z unless Z gives him money. He thus
induces Z to give him money. A has committed
extortion.

(b) A threatens Z that he will keep Z’s child in
wrongful confinement, unless Z will sign and
deliver to A a promissory note binding Z to pay
certain monies to A. Z signs and delivers the note.
A has committed extortion.

(c) A threatens to send club-men to plough up Z’s
field unless Z will sign and deliver to B a bond
binding Z under a penalty to deliver certain
produce to B, and thereby induces Z to sign and
deliver the bond. A has committed extortion.

(d) A, by putting Z in fear of grievous hurt,
dishonestly induces Z to sign or affix his seal to a
blank paper and deliver it to A. Z signs and
delivers the paper to A. Here, as the paper so
signed may be converted into a valuable security.
A has committed extortion”.

5.2 Extortion can be alleged when it is found that fear of
injury to the victim or any other person in exercised to
dishonestly induce to part with any property or valuable
security or anything singed or sealed which may be
converted into a valuable security, commits the offence of
extortion.

5.3 When the facts of the case are tested on the anvil of
the aforesaid definition of extortion, it inter alia reveals that
prosecutrix and her father was put to threat of dire
consequences and of injury if the amount of Rs. 20 Lakhs
was not paid and therefore, prima facie it appears that the
offence of extortion punishable u/S. 384 is made out.
5.4 The other offences are of cheating and forgery which
4
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
M.Cr.C No. 4022/2015
(Shri Amit Tripathi Ors. Vs. The State of M.P. ors.)

do not have any supportive imputation in the FIR except
the prosecutrix alleging that certain forged documents
were prepared in furtherance of the conspiracy hatched to
extort money from the prosecutrix and her family
members.

5.5 Since investigation is pending and the possibility of
further evidence coming on record in support of the
allegation of cheating and forgery cannot be ruled out, this
court merely because of FIR not elaborately alleging the
offence of cheating and forgery refrains from making any
comment and interference.

6. As regards the offence of criminal conspiracy u/S. 120
B of IPC is concerned, the same is defined u/S. 120-A of
IPC which is reproduced below for ready reference and
convenience:-

“120A. Definition of criminal conspiracy.–When two
or more persons agree to do, or cause to be done,–

(1) an illegal act, or

(2) an act which is not illegal by illegal means, such
an agreement is designated a criminal conspiracy:
Provided that no agreement except an agreement to
commit an offence shall amount to a criminal
conspiracy unless some act besides the agreement
is done by one or more parties to such agreement
in pursuance thereof.

Explanation.–It is immaterial whether the illegal act
is the ultimate object of such agreement, or is
merely incidental to that object.”

Criminal conspiracy arises when two or more persons
agree to do, or cause to be done, an illegal act or an act
which is not illegal by illegal means, such an agreement is
5
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
M.Cr.C No. 4022/2015
(Shri Amit Tripathi Ors. Vs. The State of M.P. ors.)

designated to be criminal conspiracy.

7. An agreement between the co-accused to commit an
offence of extortion against the prosecutrix and her father
prima facie reflects presence of ingredients of offence of
criminal conspiracy.

8. In view of above discussion, it is evident that the FIR
prima facie reflects the basic ingredients of the offence of
extortion, cheating and forgery alongwith criminal
conspiracy as alleged and the possibility of further evidence
coming on record in support of these allegations in view of
the investigation being pending cannot be ruled out,
therefore, this court in absence of any injustice or failure
of justice, declines interference and rejects the present
petition.

(Sheel Nagu)
Judge
ojha

Digitally signed by
YOGENDRA OJHA
Date: 2018.07.28
16:17:00 -07’00’

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation