PRITI SARAF & ANR. versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.

Citation: [2021] 2 S.C.R. 577 · Decided: 10-03-2021 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: INDU MALHOTRA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

cites 10 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
577
PRITI SARAF & ANR.
v.
STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.
(Criminal Appeal No. 296 of 2021)
MARCH 10, 2021
[INDU MALHOTRA AND AJAY RASTOGI, JJ.]
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.482 – Scope and ambit
of – Commercial transaction – FIR against respondent no.2 and
one more person u/ss.420, 406 and 34 IPC – High Court quashed
all the criminal proceedings – On appeal, held: To exercise powers
u/s.482, the complaint in its entirety shall have to be examined on
the basis of the allegation made in the complaint/FIR/charge-sheet
– At that stage, High Court not under an obligation to go into the
matter or examine its correctness – Whatever appears on the face
of the complaint/FIR/charge-sheet shall be taken into consideration
without any critical examination of the same – In the present case,
ingredients of the offences u/ss. 406 and 420, IPC cannot be said
to be absent on the basis of the allegations in the complaint/FIR/
charge-sheet – Sufficient material available to connect respondent
no.2 in the commission of crime – High Court not justified in
quashing the criminal proceedings – Penal Code, 1860- ss.420,
406 & 34.
Allowing the appeals, the Court
Held: 1.1 To exercise powers under Section 482 CrPC,
the complaint in its entirety shall have to be examined on the
basis of the allegation made in the complaint/FIR/charge-sheet
and the High Court at that stage was not under an obligation to
go into the matter or examine its correctness. Whatever appears
on the face of the complaint/FIR/charge-sheet shall be taken into
consideration without any critical examination of the same. The
offence ought to appear ex facie on the complaint/FIR/charge-
sheet and other documentary evidence, if any, on record. [Para
23][588-D-E]
1.2 The exercise of inherent power of the High Court is an
extraordinary power which has to be exercised with great care
[2021] 2 S.C.R. 577
577
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
578
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2021] 2 S.C.R.
and circumspection before embarking to scrutinise the complaint/
FIR/charge-sheet in deciding whether the case is the rarest of
rare case, to scuttle the prosecution at its inception. Whether
the allegations in the complaint were true is to be decided on the
basis of the evidence led at the stage of trial. [Paras 28, 30][590-
F-G; 591-C]
Nagpur Steel & Alloys Pvt. Ltd. v. P. Radhakrishna and
Others 1997 SCC(Cri) 1073 – relied on.
1.3 In the matter of exercise of inherent power by the High
Court, the only requirement is to see whether continuance of the
proceedings would be a total abuse of the process of the Court.
The Criminal Procedure Code contains a detailed procedure for
investigation, framing of charge and trial, and in the event when
the High Court is desirous of putting a halt to the known
procedure of law, it must use proper circumspection with great
care and caution to interfere in the complaint/FIR/charge-sheet
in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction. In the instant case, on a
careful reading of the complaint/FIR/charge-sheet, it cannot be
said that the complaint does not disclose the commission of an
offence. The ingredients of the offences under Sections 406 and
420 IPC cannot be said to be absent on the basis of the allegations
in the complaint/FIR/charge-sheet. Whether the allegations in
the complaint are otherwise correct or not, has to be decided on
the basis of the evidence to be led during the course of trial.
Simply because there is a remedy provided for breach of contract
or arbitral proceedings initiated at the instance of the appellants,
that does not by itself clothe the court to come to a conclusion
that civil remedy is the only remedy, and the initiation of criminal
proceedings, in any manner, will be an abuse of the process of
the court for exercising inherent powers of the High Court under
Section 482 CrPC for quashing such proceedings. This Court
has perused the pleadings of the parties, the complaint/FIR/
charge-sheet and orders of the Courts below and have taken into
consideration the material on record. The issue involved in the
matter under consideration is not a case in which the criminal
trial should have been short-circuited. The High Court was not
justified in quashing the criminal proceedings in exercise of its
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
579
inherent jurisdiction. The High Court has primarily adverted on
two circumstances, (i) that it was a case of termination of
agreement to sell on account of an alleged breach of the contract
and (ii) the fact that the arbitral proceedin

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