SUPREME COURT QUASHES CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS AGAINST ACCUSED AS THE PROSECUTION’S CASE APPEARED CONCOCTED AND FABRICATED

INTRODUCTION

A Division Bench of the Supreme Court comprising of Justice B. R. Gavai and Justice J. B. Pardiwala passed a Judgment dated 08.08.2023 in Haji Iqbal @ Bala Through S.P.O.A Vs. State of U.P & Ors. in Criminal Appeal No. 2345 of 2023 {Arising out of S.L.P (Criminal) No. 3613 of 2023} and quashed the Criminal Proceedings arising out of FIR No. 7 of 2023 dated 10.01.2023 which was registered in the Mirzapur Police Station, Saharanpur, U.P, as the entire case put forth by the Complainant prima facie seemed made-up and concocted.

FACTS

1) In the present case, one, Mr. Balraj Sethi, the Complainant-Respondent No. 3 filed a Complaint at the Mirzapur Police Station, Saharanpur, U.P. based on which an FIR No. 7 of 2023 dated 10.01.2023 was registered by the Police against the Appellant- Mahmood Haji Iqbal alias Bala for the offences of dacoity and kidnapping of the Complainant.

2) The Complainant alleged that in the year 2012, his company, V.S Contractor (Company) got a Contract for construction work related to a School Building in Glocal University, Saharanpur, Uttar Pradesh, which is owned by the Appellant-Accused. The said Project was worth Rs. 4.80 Crores. The Agreements required for the said Project were made by one, Mr. Saifuddin, Manager of Glocal University at the relevant time. The said Construction work was completed by 2015 and the outstanding amount of Rs. 1.20 Crore was to be paid by the Appellant to the Complainant. The Complainant also alleged that there were several construction materials that were kept in the Glocal Unversity worth Rs. 1.86 Crore.

3) Thereafter, the Complainant, in the year 2016 went to meet the Appellant and his brother Mahmood Ali Iqbal, asking them to return the said construction material which was kept in their property and also the Balance Amount which they owed to him. However, though they promised the Complainant that they shall give him a new Contract but they kept refusing to meet him later.

4) Thereafter, when the Complainant once again went to meet the Appellant in March 2021, the Appellant refused to return the leftover construction materials and further threatened to kill the Complainant. The Complainant along with his Partner, Mr. Yogesh Kumar, on the following Monday, again went to Glocal University, to meet the Appellant, but this time they were taken by an unknown person to the Appellant’s residence, where all the Accused persons were present. The Complainant then asked the Appellant to return the amount due from him, but the Appellant along with the other Accused, Mahmood Ali, Javed, Afzal and Alishan forcibly snatched the car key, mobile phones of the Complainant and his Partner and a sum of Rs. 80,000/- which they had in their pockets and their ID Card.

5) Moreover, the Complainant alleged that the Accused persons demanded that he hands over the original copy of all the Agreements and a sum of Rs. 10,00,000/- to be delivered to them by one of the employees of the Complainant, Mr. Karan Singh after about 6 hours. The Complainant then alleged that the Appellant kept all the Agreements along with the sum of Rs. 10 Lakhs and Rs. 80,000/- and only returned the car keys and the mobile phones of the Complainant and his Partner. Thereafter, the Complainant and his Partner managed to escape from the Appellant’s residence. The Complainant alleged that the Appellant had great influence and power in the said area where the Appellant resided, hence, the Complainant never took any action against them.

6) The Complainant, further stated that, through Mr. Karamjit Singh, who was at the relevant time doing the Construction related work, the owners of the Glocal University had filed a case against the Complainant and his brother. As a result of these circumstances, the Complainant approached the Mirzapur Police Station to lodge the aforementioned Complaint against the Appellant.

7) Aggrieved, the Appellant-Accused filed a Criminal Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 982 of 2023 in the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, for the purpose of getting the FIR quashed which was registered against them based on the Complaint made by the Complainant.

8) The High Court, vide Order dated 30.01.2023, declined to quash the FIR for the offences punishable under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) (Punishment for Dacoity), 365 IPC (Kidnapping or abducting with intent secretly and wrongfully to confine person), 342 IPC (Punishment for wrongful Confinement) and 506 IPC (Punishment for Criminal Intimidation) and thereby, rejected the Writ Petition filed by the Appellant-Accused.

9) Aggrieved by the High Court Order dated 30.01.2023, the Appellant filed Criminal Appeal No. 2345 of 2023 {Arising out of S.L.P (Criminal) No. 3613 of 2023} before the Supreme Court.

SUPREME COURT ANALYSIS

The Apex Court, vide Order dated 08.08.2023, made the following observations:

i) The Division Bench of the Supreme Court comprising of Justice B. R. Gavai and Justice J. B. Pardiwala, after hearing both sides, had only one question to deal with, i.e. whether the FIR No. 7 of 2023 registered against the Appellant for the abovementioned offences, did in fact, disclose commission of any offence.

ii) The Apex Court observed that even if the entire case of the Prosecution is believed or accepted to be true, the ingredients required to constitute the offences punishable under Sections 395, 386, 365, 342 and 506 of IPC were not made out.

iii) Further, it is also pertinent to note that the FIR was lodged in 2023 i.e. after a period of two years from the alleged incident that took place in 2021 and the said FIR did not specify any date whatsoever with regard to the alleged incident. The entire case put up by the Complainant, prima facie looked concocted and fabricated.

iv) The Supreme Court further observed that, whenever an accused comes before the High Court invoking either the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) or extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution to get the FIR or the criminal proceedings quashed essentially on the ground that such proceedings are manifestly frivolous or vexatious or instituted with the ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance, then in such circumstances the Court owes a duty to look into the FIR with much more vigilance and care.

v) Further, the Apex Court also owes its duty to the accused to look into other attending circumstances and emerging records of the case, over and above the averments, and also to try and read between the lines.

vi) Furthermore, the Supreme Court was of the belief that the High Court while exercising the jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C or Article 226 of the Constitution need not restrict itself but 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.

viii) Further, while dealing with any case, it is important to bear in mind the distinction between a case where there is no legal evidence or where there is evidence that is clearly inconsistent with the accusations made, and a case where there is legal evidence which, on appreciation, may or may not support the accusations.

viii) Applying the aforesaid principles to the present case, the Bench held that the Criminal Proceedings arising from the aforesaid FIR ought to have been quashed by the High Court, as the entire case put up by the Complainant prima facie appeared concocted and fabricated.

CONCLUSION

Thus, after considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, the Apex Court, quashed the Criminal Proceedings arising out of FIR No. 7 of 2023 dated 10.01.2023 registered at Mirzapur Police Station, Saharanpur, U.P and thereby, allowed the Appeal filed by the Appellant-Accused and further set aside the High Court Order dated 10.01.2023.

Kartik Khandekar

Associate

The Indian Lawyer