In a significant ruling by the Gujarat High Court, a landmark judgment was passed regarding the quashing of an FIR registered for offenses under Section 420 of the IPC. The case involved an amicable settlement between the parties, leading to the repayment of the disputed amount and the cessation of criminal proceedings. This judgment sets a precedent for caution in exercising powers under Section 482 of the CrPC and emphasizes the importance of sound legal principles in such cases.
Arguments
- Learned advocate Mr. Janak Parmar appears on behalf of the original complainant.
- He seeks permission to file his Vakalatnama, which is granted.
Analysis
- The petitioner sought to quash an FIR registered for offenses under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code.
- The original complainant filed an Affidavit stating an amicable resolution of the dispute and no objection to quashing the proceedings.
- The Court acknowledges the amicable settlement and the repayment of the disputed amount by the petitioner.
- Continuation of criminal proceedings would cause unnecessary harassment to the petitioner.
- The High Court’s power under Section 482 of the CrPC is discussed, emphasizing caution and sound principles in its exercise.
- The Court should not stifle legitimate prosecutions but should refrain from giving a prima facie decision when facts are incomplete and evidence is lacking.
- The amicable settlement between the parties is a significant factor in considering the quashing of proceedings.
- Referring to various previous court cases and principles laid down by the Apex Court, the impugned FIR and all consequential proceedings under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. are quashed and set aside to secure the ends of justice.
- A case under Section 420 of the IPC requires a dishonest inducement to deceive a person for delivering property to another person, as per the decision in Rekha Jain vs The State of Karnataka & Anr.
- The case of Sarabjit Kaur vs State of Punjab & Anr. emphasizes that a breach of contract alone does not lead to criminal prosecution for cheating unless a fraudulent or dishonest intention is evident from the beginning of the transaction.
- The improvement in the case with subsequent complaints and the attempt to convert a civil dispute into a criminal one to pressure the appellant to return the allegedly paid amount is highlighted.
- Criminal courts are not to be used for settling civil disputes or pressurizing parties, and allowing such proceedings would be an abuse of the court’s process.
- The FIR CR No.11210055240408 of 2024 registered with Salabatpura Police Station, Surat, and all consequential proceedings are quashed and set aside for the petitioner, with directions for release if the petitioner is in jail.
Decision
- The rule is made absolute to the extent specified
- Continuation of trial following mutual settlement between the parties deemed futile
- Direct service is permitted
Case Title: SHAMMI KUNDANLAL OBERAI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT
Case Number: R/CR.MA/8987/2024
