LexLAKHWANT SINGH versus JASBIR SINGH AND ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2008] 13 S.C.R. 544
r--
A
LAKHWANT SINGH
V.
JASBIR SINGH AND ORS.
(Criminal Appeal No. 281 of 2003)
8
SEPTEMBER 16, 2008
[DR. ARIJIT PASYAT AND G.S. SINGHVI, JJ.]
• •
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - s. 482 - Inherent
powers of High Court - Exercise of - Parameters laid down -
c Discussed - On facts, investigation was not complete and that
stage it was not permissible for High Court to look into materi-
als - High Court quashed FIR by non-reasoned order - It did
not keep in view the parameters laid down for exercise of power
u/s 482 - Thus, order of High Court set aside.
D
FIR was registered against the respondent for the al-
leged commission of theft. It was stated that the respon-
.,. . -
dents while executing the order in the!r favour, illegally took
the possession of the complainant's land in execution of
warrant of possession. Respondents filed an application
E u/s 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the FIR. High Court held that
FIR could not be registered on basis of the said allegations;
,-
and that the said aspect could be examined if objections
were filed before the concerned Court that warrant officer/
bailiff acted beyond the warrant of possession, and al-
F lowed the application. Hence the present appeal.
Appellant referring to the annexure contented that
the Single Judge without even analyzing the factual and
legal aspects, by an abrupt conclusion should not have
quashed the proceedings; that the challan had already
G been filed in the Court, and the Judicial Magistrate had
committed the case to the Sessions Judge; and that while
considering the application filed in terms of Section 438
cr.P.C., the Additional Sessions Judge, passed a detailed
...,.,
order highlighting the role played by respondents.
H
544
LAKHWANT SINGH v. JASBIR SINGH
545
_ _,
ANO ORS.
Allowing the appeal, the Court
A
HELD: The investigation was not complete and at
that stage it was .impermissible for the High Court to look
into materials, the acceptability of which is essentially a
matter for trial. While exercising jurisdiction under Sec-
B
( ...
)..
tion 482 Cr.P.C, it is not permissible for the Cou{t to act as
if it was a trial court. Even when charge is framed at that
stage, the Court has to only prima facie be satisfied about
the existence of sufficient ground for proceeding against
the accused. For that limited purpose, the Court can evalu-
ate material and documents on records but it cannot ap- c
preciate evidence. The Court is not required to appreci-
ate evidence to conclude whether the materials produced
are sufficient or not for convicting the accused. The Court
should not act on annexures to the petition under sec-
tion 482 Cr.PC., which cannot be termed as evidence with-
D
---,'
out being tested and proved. The non-reasoned order of
the High Court does not reveal that the parameters relat-
ing to exercise of power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. were
kept in view. Thus, the order of the High Court is directed
to be set aside. [Paras 10 and 12] [553-D-F; 554-A-B]
E
R.P. Kapur v State of Punjab AIR 1960 SC 866; State of
Haryana v. Bhajan Lal 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335; The Janata
Dal etc. v. H.S. Chowdhary and Ors., etc. AIR 1993 SC 892; '"
Dr. Raghubir Saran v. State of Bihar and Anr. AIR 1964 SC 1;
Mrs. Dhanalakshmi v. R. Prasanna Kumar and Ors. AIR 1990
F
SC 494; State of Bihar and another v. P P Sharma, I.A. S. and
another 1992 Suppl (1) SCC 222; Rupan Deof Bajaj (Mrs.)
and Anr. v. Kanwar Pal Singh Gill and another 1995 (6) sec
194; State of Kera/a and Ors. v. 0. C. Kuttan and Ors. 1999 (2)
sec 651; State of UP v. o. P Sharma 1996 (7) sec 705; G
Rashmi Kumar (Smt.) v Mahesh Kumar Bhada 1997 (2) SCC
397; Satvinder Kaur v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) and Anr.
---...
1999 (8) SCC 728; Rajesh Bajaj v State NCT of Delhi and
Ors. AIR 1999 SC 1216; State of Karnataka v M. Devendrappa
and another 2002 (3) SCC 89;Jehan Singh v Delhi Admn.
H
546
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2008] 13 S.C.R.
).--
J\
1974 (4) SCC 522; Chand Ohawan v. Jawahar Lal 1992 (3)
SCC 317; State of Orissa v Saro} Kumar Sahoo 2005 (13)
SCC 540; R.P Kapur v. State of Punjab AIR 1960 SC 866 -
relied on.
Case Law Reference
B
AIR 1960 SC 866
Relied on.
5
.( ..
1992 Supp (1) sec 335
Relied on.
6
AIR 1993 SC 892
Relied on.
7
AIR 1964 SC 1
Relied on.
7
c
AIR 1990 SC 494
Relied on.
7
1992 Suppl (1) sec 222
Relied on.
7
1995 (6) sec 194
Relied on.
7
1999 (2) sec 651
Relied on.
7Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.