Blog

CASE TITLE- Deepak Kumar Shrivas & Anr. Appellant(S) Versus State of Chhattisgarh & Ors.

CASE NUMBER- Criminal Appeal No. Of 2024 @ Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 9800 Of 2023

DATED ON- 19.02.2024

QUORUM- Hon’ble Justice Vikram Nath and Hon’ble Justice Satish Chandra Sharma

FACTS OF THE CASE

The appellant made a complaint alleging that the respondent no.6 had allured the appellant that she would secure a job for his brother as she had good contacts with higher officers and demanded substantial amount for doing this favour. The appellant paid Rs. 80,000/- cash at the first instance. Later on an additional demand was made and the appellant, he has deposited about Rs. 20,000/- and odd in different bank accounts. When no job was provided to his brother, he approached the respondent no.6 for returning the money paid by him upon which she threatened him of false implication and started avoiding him. The report made by superintendent of police showed that both the parties were accusing each other of having extracted money for securing job for their relatives. It appears that the appellant had taken about Rs.4 lacs from her for securing a job for her daughter and no job was provided by the appellant to her daughter moreover, the appellant and respondent failed to produce the relevant documents. The respondent filed an FIR against the appellant accordingly. The appellant filed a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution before the High Court of Chhattisgarh for quashing the FIR and the proceedings arising therefrom. The said petition has since been dismissed by the impugned order giving rise to filing of the present appeal.

LEGAL PROVISIONS

No statute or legal provisions were referred before the court of law for reaching the ultimate decision.

CONTENTIONS OF THE APPELLANT

Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that an enquiry was conducted in which similar allegations against each other were made by both the sides which were not found to be substantiated and, therefore, lodging of the impugned FIR after about one year of the said enquiry, is mala fide and an abuse of the process of law. Further, the impugned FIR has been maliciously lodged only to resist the appellant from recovering the amount paid by him to the respondent no.6. It is also submitted that the FIR has been after more than three years and, therefore, on the ground of delay, the alleged FIR deserves to be quashed.

CONTENTIONS OF THE RESPONDENT

Learned counsel for the respondents have submitted that the investigation must be allowed to continue and if ultimately the police report is submitted finding the appellant prima facie guilty of the charge on the basis of the evidence collected during the investigation, the appellant would have adequate remedy of assailing the charge sheet and also claiming discharge at the stage of framing of charges. There is no justification for scuttling the investigation which may ultimately not only deprive the respondent no.6 of her money but also the offence committed by the appellant would go unpunished. It was also submitted that it was a clear case of cheating as the appellant had deceitfully induced the respondent no.6.

COURT’S ANALYSIS AND JUDGEMENT

The court observed that, respondent no.6 was well aware of the complaint made by the appellant. Despite the same she did not lodge any complaint against the appellant and his brother and waited for more than a year to lodge the FIR. The entire material was totally an unlawful contract between the parties where money was being paid for securing a job. The police should exercise caution when drawn into dispute pertaining to such unethical transactions between private parties which need investigations. The criminal prosecution should not be allowed to continue where the object to lodge the FIR is not for criminal prosecution and for punishing the offender for the offence committed but for recovery of money under coercion pressure. Accordingly, the court set aside the impugned order passed by the High Court and quashed the entire proceedings.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

Judgement Reviewed By- Shreyasi Ghatak