SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Shaukat Ali And Ors vs State Of Bihar And Anr on 17 May, 2019

INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJUDICATUREATPATNA
CRIMINALMISCELLANEOUSNo.6978of2015
ArisingOutofComplaintCaseNo.-132CYear-2013Thana-WESTCHAMPARAN
COMPLAINTDistrict-WestChamparan

1.ShaukatAli,SonofLateSadikMian.

2.FirozMianSonofShaukatAli.

3.NasirAlamSonofShaukatAli.

4.AftabAlamSonofShaukatAli.

5.ShahrukhHussainSonofShaukatAli.

AllresidentsofVillage-Gaunaha,P.S.-Gaunaha,District-West
Champaran.

6.QyumMianSonofLatifMian,residentofVillage-SemariDumari,P.S.-

Gaunaha,District-WestChamparan.

7.AlimMianSonofLateJainulMian,ResidentofVillage-Chatiya,P.S.-

Malahi,District-EastChamparan.

……Petitioner/s
Versus

1.TheStateofBihar

2.Md.Amir@Md.NathuSonofMd.AlamMian@Md.MahmoodAlam,
residentofVillage-Santpur,Pipra,P.S.-Mainatand,District-West
Champaran.

……OppositeParty/s

Appearance:

ForthePetitioner/s:Mr.UmeshChandraVerma,Advocate
FortheState:Mr.Md.Arif,APP

CORAM:HONOURABLEMR.JUSTICEAHSANUDDIN
AMANULLAH
ORALJUDGMENT
Date:17-05-2019

Heardlearnedcounselforthepetitionersandlearned

APPfortheState.

2.Despiteserviceofnoticeonoppositepartyno.2,

nobodyappearedwhenthecasewastakenupandheard.
PatnaHighCourtCR.MISC.No.6978of2015dt.17-05-2019
2/9

3.ThepetitionershavemovedtheCourtunderSection

482oftheCodeofCriminalProcedure,1973(hereinafterreferred

toasthe’Code’)forthefollowingrelief:

“Thatthisisanapplicationforquashing
theorderdated28.05.2014passedbySriP.K.
Shukla,thelearnedJudicialMagistrate,1stClass,
Bettiah,WestChamparan,inTrialNo.3099of2014
arisingoutofComplaintCaseNo.132-Cof2013,
wherebyandwhereunderthepetitionerswere
summonedtofacetrialfortheoffencesunder
Sectionsection379oftheIndianPenalCode(IPC).”

4.Theoppositepartyno.2hadfiledComplaintCase

No.132(C)of2013againstthepetitionersallegingthattheywere

armedwithcountrymadepistol,knives,dabiyaandironrodwhich

wasusedtointimidatetheoppositepartyno.2andhisfatherand

onsuchthreat,Rs.2,500/-incash,mobileworthRs.4,600/-,cash

Rs.1,300/-wristwatchworthRs.1,100/-andbagcontaining

ornamentsandclothesworthRs.75,000/-wastakenawaybythe

accused.Itwasfurtherallegedthatwhileretreatingthepetitioner

no.3gavethreateningandopenedfire.

5.Learnedcounselforthepetitionerssubmittedthatthe

presentcaseisaclassicexampleofmisuseandabuseofthe

processoftheCourt.Itwassubmittedthatthecomplaintalso

suffersfromsuppressionofmaterialfactswhichexposesthemala

fidebehindfilingofsuchcomplaint.Itwassubmittedthatthe

oppositepartyno.2istheson-in-lawofthepetitionerno.1and
PatnaHighCourtCR.MISC.No.6978of2015dt.17-05-2019
3/9

thedaughterofthepetitionerno.1hadearlierfiledComplaint

CaseNo.1854-Cof2012on08.08.2012againsttheopposite

partyno.2andhisfamilymembersunderSections323,Section498A,

Section504oftheIndianPenalCodeand3/4oftheSectionDowryProhibition

Act.Itwassubmittedthatinthesaidcase,afterenquiry,summons

havebeenissuedagainsttheaccused.Learnedcounselsubmitted

thatasacounterblasttothesaidcase,thepresentcomplaintcase

hasbeenfiledon11.1.2013.Learnedcounselsubmittedthatthe

malafideintentiononthepartoftheoppositepartyno.2would

beexposedbythefactofhimbeingtheson-in-lawofthe

petitionerno.1,beingmarriedtohisdaughter,hasnotevenbeen

whisperedintheentirecomplaintcase,and,thus,theopposite

partyno.2hastriedtoplaysmartevenwiththeCourtby

suppressinghiscloserelationshipwiththeaccusedasalsothefact

thatmuchpriortofilingofthepresentcase,heandhisfamily

memberswerealreadyaccusedinacomplaintcasefiledbyhis

wifei.e.,thedaughterofpetitionerno.1.Learnedcounsel

submittedthatthestoryasnarratedinthecomplaint,ofthe

accusedpointingknivesontheabdomen,pistolattheheadand

dabiyaattheneckisnotonlyunbelievablebutactuallycomical.It

wassubmittedthatsuchallegationisonlyforthepurposeof

sensationalisinganddramatizinganoccurrencewhichnevertook

place.Learnedcounselsubmittedthatevenotherwise,whenthe
PatnaHighCourtCR.MISC.No.6978of2015dt.17-05-2019
4/9

oppositepartyno.2andhisfamilymembers,includinghisfather,

wereaccusedinthecomplaintcasefiledbythedaughterofthe

petitionerno.1,muchpriortothecomplaintcase,therecould

havebeenabsolutelynooccasionforthemtocommitsuchcrime

knowingfullywellthattheywouldbeidentifiedandalso

prosecuted.Learnedcounselsubmittedthatbysuchsuppression

ofvitalfactonthepartoftheoppositepartyno.2,hehasnot

cometotheCourtwithcleanhands.Itwassubmittedthatthe

basicrequirementofanypersonapproachinganyCourtoflawis

toapproachtheforumwithcleanhandsafterplacingallfacts

whichareknowntohimandthepresentfactofbeingsoclosely

relatedtotheaccusedbeingintheknowledgeoftheopposite

partyno.2andnotevenbeingindicatedintheentirecomplaint

case,clearlyshowsthathehasnotapproachedtheCourtwith

cleanhandsandonthisgroundalone,thepresentapplication

deservestoallowedandactionagainsttheoppositepartyno.2is

alsorequiredforsuchmisconduct.Itwassubmittedthatinthe

aforesaidbackground,thecomplaintcasefiledbytheopposite

partyno.2isclearlyanabuseoftheprocessoftheCourt.

6.LearnedAPPfairlysubmittedthatinviewofthefacts

broughtonrecordintheapplicationandasnoticedbytheCourt,

thepresentcaseappearstobetotallywithoutanyiotaof

truthfulness.

PatnaHighCourtCR.MISC.No.6978of2015dt.17-05-2019
5/9

7.Havingconsideredthefactsandcircumstancesofthe

caseandsubmissionsoflearnedcounselfortheparties,theCourt

findsthatacaseforinterferencehasbeenmadeout.

8.Atthisjuncture,theCourtdeemsitworthwhileto

quoteparagraphsno.23to26ofthejudgmentpassedin

AshutoshMukherjeev.TheStateofBihar[Cr.Misc.No.

47012of2014,judgmentdated18-04-2019],whichreadas

under:

“23.SectionInJitendraRaghuvanshiv.BabitaRaghuvanshi
reportedas(2013)4SCC58,theHon’bleSupremeCourtin
paragraphno.14opined:

“14.TheinherentpowersoftheHighCourtunder
Section482oftheCodearewideandunfettered…”

(emphasissupplied)

24.SectionInParbatbhaiAahirv.StateofGujarat
reportedas(2017)9SCC641,theHon’bleSupremeCourt,
atparagraphsno.11,16.1and16.4held:

“11.Section482isprefacedwithan
overridingprovision.Thestatutesavesthe
inherentpoweroftheHighCourt,asasuperior
court,tomakesuchordersasarenecessary(i)
topreventanabuseoftheprocessofanycourt;
or(ii)otherwisetosecuretheendsofjustice…
xxxx

16.1Section482preservestheinherent
powersoftheHighCourttopreventanabuseof
theprocessofanycourtortosecuretheendsof
justice.Theprovisiondoesnotconfernew
powers.Itonlyrecognisesandpreservespowers
whichinhereintheHighCourt.

PatnaHighCourtCR.MISC.No.6978of2015dt.17-05-2019
6/9

xxxx

16.4.Whiletheinherentpowerofthe
HighCourthasawideambitandplenitudeithas
tobeexercised(i)tosecuretheendsofjustice,or

(ii)topreventanabuseoftheprocessofany
court.”(emphasissupplied)

25.Itwouldbepertinenttopointoutobservationsof
thisCourtinSectionRupeshKumarv.TheStateofBihar[Cr.
Misc.No.30470of2016,orderdated21.02.2019]at
paragraphsno.9and15:

“9.Fromtheaforesaid,itis
abundantlyclearthatthisCourthasaninherent
dutytoensurethatwheneveritcomesacross
materialswhichjustifyaparticularcourseof
action,itshouldnotshyawayfromdischarging
itsconstitutionalobligations…

xxxx

15…Moreover,everyCourtof
extraordinaryjurisdiction,moresoa
ConstitutionalCourt,liketheHighCourt,hasan
inherentoriginalpowervestedinit,where,for
securingtheendsofjustice,certainexerciseof
power,ifrequired,mayberesortedto.Such
extraordinarypowercannotbecurtailed,except
thatitbeinvokedinnecessarycircumstances.”

(emphasissupplied)

26.TheHighCourt,beingaConstitutionalCourt,retains
enormousandinherentpowerstoactintheinterestofjustice.
Sufficeitwould,tostatethatanylimitationwhatsoeverin
exerciseofsuchpower,wouldbeself-imposed,basedonthe
Court’sdiscretion,havingdueregardtothepeculiarfactsand
circumstancesofthecase.UnderSection482oftheCode,
theHighCourtonlyexercisestheextraordinarypowersit
possessesbyvirtueofthefactthatitisaHighCourt.Section
482oftheCodebeginswithanon-obstanteclauseand,as
PatnaHighCourtCR.MISC.No.6978of2015dt.17-05-2019
7/9

such,theHighCourt’sinterminablejurisdictioncannotbe
fetteredorwhittleddown.”

9.TheHon’bleSupremeCourtinSectionStateofHaryanavs.

BhajanLal,reportedas1992Supp(1)SCC335,atparagraph

no.102hasenumeratedcategorieswheretheCourtwould

exerciseitsinherentpowerunderSection482oftheCode.The

samereadsasunder:

“102.Inthebackdropoftheinterpretationof
thevariousrelevantprovisionsSectionoftheCodeunderChapter
XIVandoftheprinciplesoflawenunciatedbythisCourtin
aseriousofdecisionsrelatingtotheexerciseofthe
extraordinarypowerunderSectionArticle226ortheinherent
powersunderSection482oftheCodewhichwehave
extractedandreproducedabove,wegivethefollowing
categoriesofcasesbywayofillustrationwhereinsuch
powercouldbeexercisedeithertopreventabuseofthe
processofanycourtorotherwisetosecuretheendsof
justice,thoughitmaynotbepossibletolaydownany
precise,clearlydefinedandsufficientlychannelisedand
inflexibleguidelinesorrigidformulaeandtogivean
exhaustivelistofmyriadkindsofcaseswhereinsuchpower
shouldbeexercised.

(1)Wheretheallegationsmadeinthefirst
informationreportorthecomplaint,eveniftheyare
takenattheirfacevalueandacceptedintheirentirety
donotprimafacieconstituteanyoffenceormakeouta
caseagainsttheaccused.

(2)Wheretheallegationsinthefirst
informationreportandothermaterials,ifany,
accompanyingtheFIRdonotdiscloseacognizable
offence,justifyinganinvestigationbypoliceofficers
underSection156(1)SectionoftheCodeexceptunderan
orderofaMagistratewithinthepurviewofSection
155(2)oftheCode.

(3)Wheretheuncontrovertedallegations
madeintheFIRorcomplaintandtheevidence
collectedinsupportofthesamedonotdisclosethe
PatnaHighCourtCR.MISC.No.6978of2015dt.17-05-2019
8/9

commissionofanyoffenceandmakeoutacase
againsttheaccused.

(4)Where,theallegationsintheFIRdonot
constituteacognizableoffencebutconstituteonlya
non-cognizableoffence,noinvestigationispermitted
byapoliceofficerwithoutanorderofaMagistrateas
contemplatedunderSection155(2)oftheCode.

(5)WheretheallegationsmadeintheFIR
orcomplaintaresoabsurdandinherentlyimprobable
onthebasisofwhichnoprudentpersoncaneverreach
ajustconclusionthatthereissufficientgroundfor
proceedingagainsttheaccused.

(6)Wherethereisanexpresslegalbar
engraftedinanyoftheprovisionsSectionoftheCodeorthe
concernedAct(underwhichacriminalproceedingis
instituted)totheinstitutionandcontinuanceofthe
proceedingsand/orwherethereisaspecificprovision
inSectiontheCodeortheconcernedAct,providingefficacious
redressforthegrievanceoftheaggrievedparty.

(7)Whereacriminalproceedingis
manifestlyattendedwithmalafideand/orwherethe
proceedingismaliciouslyinstitutedwithanulterior
motiveforwreakingvengeanceontheaccusedand
withaviewtospitehimduetoprivateandpersonal
grudge.”

10.Thepresentcase,intheopinionoftheCourt,is

coveredundercategories5and7oftheaforesaiddecisionin

BhajanLal(supra)atparagraphno.102.

11.Similarly,theHon’bleSupremeCourtinSectionStateof

Karnatakav.L.Muniswamy,reportedas(1977)2SCC699,at

paragraphno.7,hasobservedasfollows:

“7……….Intheexerciseofthis
wholesomepower,theHighCourtisentitledto
quashaproceedingifitcomestotheconclusionthat
allowingtheproceedingtocontinuewouldbean
abuseoftheprocessoftheCourtorthattheendsof
justicerequirethattheproceedingoughttobe
quashed.ThesavingoftheHighCourt’sinherent
PatnaHighCourtCR.MISC.No.6978of2015dt.17-05-2019
9/9

powers,bothincivilandcriminalmatters,is
designedtoachieveasalutarypublicpurposewhich
isthataCourtproceedingoughtnottobepermitted
todegenerateintoaweaponofharassmentor
persecution.Inacriminalcase,theveiledobject
behindalameprosecution,theverynatureofthe
materialonwhichthestructureoftheprosecution
restsandthelikewouldjustifytheHighCourtin
quashingtheproceedingintheinterestof
justice……”

12.Intheaforesaidbackground,theCourtfindsthatthe

presentcomplaintcaseistotallymalicious,filedwithmalafide

intention,forwreakingvengeanceandtoharassthepetitioners

and,thus,isanabuseoftheprocessoftheCourt.

13.Accordingly,theapplicationisallowed.Theentire

criminalproceedingrelatingtoComplaintCaseNo.132(C)of

2013,includingtheorderdated28.05.2014,bywhichcognizance

hasbeentakenandsummonsissuedtothepetitionersbytheCourt

belowatBettiahinthedistrictofWestChamparan,stands

quashed.

(AhsanuddinAmanullah,J.)

P.Kumar
AFR/NAFRAFR
U
T

Leave a Reply

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

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