MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI versus RAM KISHAN ROHTAGI AND OTHERS

Citation: [1983] 1 S.C.R. 884 · Decided: 01-12-1982 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S. MURTAZA FAZAL ALI · Disposal: Case Partly allowed

Cited by 9 judgment(s) · cites 2 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
8 
c 
D 
884 
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI 
v. 
RAM KISHAN ROHTAGI AND OTHERS 
December 1, 1982 
[S. MURTAZA FAZAL ALI AND E.S. VENKATARAMIAH, JJ.] 
Code of Criminal Procedure, 197J-ss. 482, 397(2) and 319-Allegations in 
complaint not constituting offence against accused-Exercise of High. Court's 
inherent power under s. 482 to quash interlocutory order summoning accused 
not affected by s. 3R7(2}-Court has power under s. 319 to proceed against such 
accused on production -of additional evidence. -
" 
A Food Inspector of the Municipal Corporation visited the premises of a 
shopkeeper and purchased a sample of toffees which, when analysed by Public 
Analyst, was found not to con(orm to the prescribed standards. In clause No. -5 
of the complaint filed before the Magistrate it was stated : 
''That the accused No. 3 is the Manager of accused No. 2 and 
accused No. 4 to 7 are the Directors of accused No. 2 and a1 such 
they were incharge of and responsible for the conduct of business of 
accused No. 2 at the time of sampling." 
· 
E 
Accused No. 2 was the Company which manufactured the toffees,-accused No. 3 
·was its Manager and accused Nos. 4 to 7 were its Directors (respondents I to S 
here). The Magistrate passed an order summoning all the accused for being 
tried for violation or-sS. 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and 
that order was assailed before the High Court. 
F 
G 
H 
It was argued before the High Court ihat lhe complaint did not attribute 
any criminal responsibility to~ the Directors inasmuch as there -was no clear 
averment of the fact that the pirectors were really int:harge of the manufacture 
of toffees and were responsible for the conduct of ~usiness and that the words 
'as such' in clause No .. 5 of the complaint indicated that the complainant had 
merely ;u;~sumed that the Directors of the Company must be guilty because 
they were .. holding a particular ~ffice. The High Court accepted the argument 
and quashed the procedings against the Directors as well as· the Manager of the 
Company. 
In appeal, it- was contended on behalf of the appellant that .on the 
allegations made jn the complaint, a clear case had been made out against all 
the respondents and the High Court ought not to have quashed the proceedings 
on the ground that the compJaint did not disclose any offence. Counsel for 
respondents contended that even taking the allegations of the complaint. ex facie 
no case for triaJ had beCn made Out. 
I . 
'>-
,-
·~ 
)• 
MUNICIPAL CO~PN. V. R.K. &OHTAGI 
SSS 
Upholding the order of the High Court in respect of quashing of pro-
ceedings aRainst the Directors and allowing the appeal in respect of quashing of 
proceedings against the Manager. 
HELD : Where the allegations set out in the co~plaint do not .constitute 
any offence it is competent to the High Court exercising its inherent jurisdiction 
··under s. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 to quash the order passed 
by the Magistrate' taking cognizance of the offence. It is true that •· 397(2) bars 
the jurisdiction of the court in respect of 
i~terlocutory orders. But -s. 482 
confers a separate and independent power on the High Court aloile to pass orders 
ex debito justltiae .in cases where grave and substantial injustice bas been done 
or where the process of the cour·t has been seriously abused. It is not merely a 
revisional power meant to be exercised agai~st the orders passed. by subordinate 
courts. Nothing in s. 397(2) limits or affects the inherent power under s. -482. 
The scoPe". ambit and range of ~be power under s. 482 are quite diffefent from 
those of the power conferred under s. 397. It may be that in some cases there 
may be overlapping but such cases would be few and far between. It is well 
settled that the inherent powers under s. 482 can be exercised only when nO 
other remedy is avililabJe to the· litigant and not Where a specific remedy is 
' 
pro_viOed by the statute. ·It is 1clear that proceedings against ati accused-in the 
initial stages earl be quashed only if on the face of the complaint or the papers 
accompanying the same, no offence is constituted. The test is that taking the 
alJegations and the complaint as they are, without adding or -subtracting anything, 
if no' offence is made out then the High Court 'would be justified in quashin8 the 
proceedings in the exercise of its powers under s. 482. 
, . 
[889 A-B,,G; 887 C; 888 A-B; 887 G-H; 888 C-D; 890 A-BJ 
Madhu Limaye v. State 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.