LexANUKUL SINGH versus STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANR.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2025] 9 S.C.R. 1401 : 2025 INSC 1153 Anukul Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Anr. (Criminal Appeal No. 4250 of 2025) 24 September 2025 [B.V. Nagarathna and R. Mahadevan,* JJ.] Issue for Consideration Issue arose whether the High Court was justified in rejecting the application seeking quashing of the charge sheet as well as the consequential proceedings arising out of the FIR registered for offences punishable u/ss.420, 467, and 468 IPC. Headnotes† Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.482 – Quashing of the proceedings – Converting civil disputes into criminal proceedings – FIR registered for offences punishable u/ss.420, 467, and 468 IPC against the appellant – Appellant sought quashing of the charge sheet as well as the consequential proceedings arising out of the FIR stating that the FIR and charge sheet do not disclose any criminal offence and relate to civil disputes, for which the complainant had not availed appropriate civil remedies – High Court dismissed the application – Legality: Held: u/s.482, it is the duty of the High Court to intervene where continuation of criminal proceedings would amount to an abuse of process of law, or where the dispute is purely of a civil nature and criminal colour has been artificially given to it – As many as eight FIRs were lodged against the appellant, including the instant one, all of which, in substance, arise out of a civil dispute relating to ownership and possession of the property – Initiation of the present criminal proceedings, thus, amounts to a clear abuse of the process of law, where the dispute is manifestly civil in nature and has been given a criminal colour and the prosecution is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive – Even if accepted in entirety, these allegations disclose, at best, a civil dispute and do not prima facie constitute the essential ingredients of the criminal * Author 1402 [2025] 9 S.C.R. Supreme Court Reports offences alleged – Mala fide nature of the complaint is fortified by the fact that, the trial court convicted complainant u/s.138 of the N.I. Act, which lends strong support to the appellant’s case that the initiation of the present FIR was a retaliatory measure, maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive to neutralise the lawful action taken by him – Despite this background, the police proceeded to file a charge sheet against the appellant for offences u/ss.420, 467, and 468 IPC – Essential ingredients of cheating or forgery not prima facie made out – Institution of multiple FIRs in quick succession, particularly after the appellant had already initiated lawful proceedings, reinforces the inference of mala fides – High Court, in refusing to quash the proceedings, misdirected itself in law by failing to apply the ratio that the machinery of criminal law cannot be permitted to be misused for settling civil disputes or to wreak vengeance – Impugned judgment of the High Court set aside – FIR and the consequential charge sheet pending before the trial court, quashed. [Paras 11.5-16, 20-22] Case Law Cited State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal [1990] Supp. 3 SCR 259 : (1992) Supp. 1 SCC 335 : 1992 SCC (Cri) 426 – relied on. Suryalakshmi Cotton Mills Ltd. v. Rajvir Industries Ltd. [2008] 1 SCR 432 : (2008) 13 SCC 678; Anand Kumar Mohatta v. State (NCT of Delhi) [2018] 13 SCR 1028 : (2019) 11 SCC 706; Mukesh and Others v. State of UP and Others, SLP (Crl) No. 12354 of 2024 decided on 29.11.2024; Md. Allauddin Khan v. State of Bihar and Others [2019] 5 SCR 876 : Criminal Appeal No. 675 of 2019; Rajiv Thapar v. Madal Lal Kapoor [2013] 3 SCR 52 : (2013) 3 SCC 330; HMT Watches v. Abida [2015] 3 SCR 719 : (2015) 11 SCC 776; Rathish Babu Unnikrishnan v. The State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) and Others [2022] 4 SCR 989 : MANU/SC/0542/2022; CBI v. Aryan Singh [2023] 2 SCR 819 : (2023) 18 SCC 399; Suryalakshmi Cotton Mills Ltd v. Rajvir Industries Ltd [2008] 1 SCR 432 : (2008) 13 SCC 678; Indian Oil Corporation v. M/s. NEPC India Ltd. [2006] Supp. 3 SCR 704 : (2006) 6 SCC 738; Inder Mohan Goswami and Another v. State of Uttaranchal and Others [2007] 10 SCR 847 : AIR 2008 SC 251; Ganga Dhar Kalita v. State of Assam [2015] 4 SCR 373 : (2015) 9 SCC 647; Shailesh Kumar Singh @ Shailesh R. Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others, 2025 INSC 869 : Criminal Appeal No. 2963/2025 decided on 14.07.2025 – referred to. [2025] 9 S.C.R. 1403 Anukul Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Anr. List of
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.