When the High Courts are requested to exercise their powers under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), they should meticulously scrutinize whether the accusations at hand indeed amount to the alleged offense : Supreme Court
The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of RAJARAM SHARMA v. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR. underscored a critical procedural aspect when the High Court is petitioned to exercise its authority under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C) to quash a criminal case. The Supreme Court emphasized the obligation of the High Court to meticulously assess whether the allegations presented would indeed constitute the offenses charged against the accused.
The case in question involved an accused-appellant who approached the High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C seeking the quashing of criminal charges under Sections 420 (Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property), 406 (Punishment for criminal breach of trust), 504 (Intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace), and 506 (Punishment for Criminal Intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
The High Court, in its order, refused to quash the criminal proceedings, stating that the disputed questions of fact necessitated evidence and were beyond the purview of adjudication under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Dissatisfied with this decision, the accused-appellant appealed to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court, upon scrutinizing the FIR and the subsequently filed charge sheet, noted a significant oversight in the High Court's order. It found that the essential ingredients required to constitute the alleged offenses under Sections 420, 406, 504, and 506 of the IPC were not established. Criticizing the High Court for neglecting to address this crucial aspect, the Supreme Court remarked that it was imperative for the High Court, when invoked under Section 482 Cr.P.C, to assess whether the allegations could indeed establish the offenses attributed to the appellant.
In addition to pointing out the deficiency in the High Court's analysis, the Supreme Court highlighted that no civil proceedings had been initiated against the appellant by the second respondent or other concerned parties. Despite the appellant's contentions on this matter, the second respondent chose not to appear and contest the case.
As a result of its findings, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal, effectively quashing the criminal case pending against the accused-appellant.