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

[email protected]@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