IPC 420 - The Legal Chamber

Supreme Court Clarifies Law on Seized Property, Says “Expediency” Under CrPC Has Limits

9Nov

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Clarifies Law on Seized Property, Says “Expediency” Under CrPC Has Limits

The Supreme Court held that the release of case property (cash) under Section 451 CrPC was premature. The ownership of seized money, being the proceeds of alleged crime with multiple claimants, cannot be determined conclusively at an interim stage but must be adjudicated after a full trial upon consideration of all evidence. Facts Of The Case: The case originated from an FIR (CR No. 11206078220159 of 2022) alleging that the appellant-accused, through his proprietary firm Jay Gopal Trading Company, committed cheating and criminal breach of trust against a complainant and other merchants in transactions involving castor seeds. During the investigation, the police seized cash amounting to Rs. 50,00,000. Respondent No. 2, another merchant claiming the seized cash was for goods he sold to the...

Supreme Court Quashes FIR in Property Dispute, Calls it “Abuse of Process of Law”

6Nov

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Quashes FIR in Property Dispute, Calls it “Abuse of Process of Law”

The Supreme Court quashed the criminal proceedings, holding that the continuation thereof amounted to an abuse of the process of law. The allegations, arising from a civil dispute over a loan and its guarantee, did not constitute a criminal offense, especially after the withdrawal of an earlier complaint on the same cause of action. Facts Of The Case: This case originated from an FIR registered against the appellant, Bhawana Jain, under Sections 406, 420, 504, and 506 of the IPC. The dispute concerned a plot purchased jointly by her deceased husband and the complainant, Respondent No. 2. After a mutual partition, the husband mortgaged his share to secure a bank loan, with the appellant acting as a guarantor. Following her husband's death in 2016, the complainant filed a private complaint...

Supreme Court Upholds Anticipatory Bail Rejection, Stresses Timely Bail Hearings

4Nov

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Upholds Anticipatory Bail Rejection, Stresses Timely Bail Hearings

The Supreme Court affirmed the denial of anticipatory bail, emphasizing that custodial interrogation may be necessary to establish complicity and intent, even in cases based on documentary evidence. The Court underscored the gravity of allegations involving abuse of official position. It further issued general directions mandating the expeditious disposal of bail applications to uphold the constitutional right to personal liberty under Articles 14 and 21. Facts Of The Case: Based on a complaint concerning fraudulent property transfer, an FIR was registered in 2019 regarding events from 1996. The core allegation was that a sale deed was executed using forged Powers of Attorney, which were purportedly signed by individuals who were already deceased. This sale deed was then used to mutate l...

Marksheet Tampering Case: Supreme Court Sets Aside Conviction, Criticizes Lack of Forensic Proof

28Oct

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Marksheet Tampering Case: Supreme Court Sets Aside Conviction, Criticizes Lack of Forensic Proof

The Supreme Court overturned the conviction, holding that the prosecution failed to prove the appellant's authorship of the alleged forgery beyond a reasonable doubt. The absence of expert evidence on handwriting, lack of proof of exclusive custody of the documents, and the failure to establish mens rea were fatal to the case. The court also noted prejudicial non-compliance with Section 313 CrPC. Facts Of The Case: The appellant, a student pursuing a Bachelor of Social Work, had failed her compulsory English paper in the 1998 summer session examinations, securing only 10 marks upon revaluation. To gain admission to the third-year course (BSW Part-III), she submitted her original mark-sheet and the revaluation notification to her college. The admission clerk and the principal verified the...

Supreme Court Shields Daughters-in-Law from Criminal Case Over Property Will

28Aug

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Shields Daughters-in-Law from Criminal Case Over Property Will

The Supreme Court quashed criminal proceedings under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, and 471 IPC, ruling the allegations did not prima facie constitute the alleged offences. Relying on Bhajan Lal, it held that criminal process cannot be used to settle civil disputes, as it amounts to an abuse of the court's process. Facts Of The Case: A testator, Shri Ram Baksh Dubey, executed an unregistered will in 1993 bequeathing his property to his four daughters-in-law, apprehensive that his third son, Ashish Kumar, would squander the estate. After the testator’s death in 1994, Ashish Kumar sold his purported share to the complainant, Balram, via a registered sale deed. The daughters-in-law, unaware of this sale, successfully obtained a mutation order in their favor based on the will. When Balram inte...

Can’t Reopen Closed Cases Without New Proof: Supreme Court’s Landmark Ruling for Sportspersons

23Aug

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Can’t Reopen Closed Cases Without New Proof: Supreme Court’s Landmark Ruling for Sportspersons

The Supreme Court quashed the FIR, ruling the allegations of forgery and cheating did not disclose the essential ingredients of Sections 420, 468, or 471 IPC. It held that continuing the prosecution, after prior exoneration by competent authorities without new evidence, constituted a clear abuse of the legal process. Facts Of The Case: In 2022, a private complaint was filed by Nagaraja M.G. alleging that badminton players Chirag Sen and Lakshya Sen, their parents, and their coach, Vimal Kumar, had conspired to falsify the players’ dates of birth to gain illegal entry into age-restricted tournaments. The complaint was based primarily on an alleged 1996 GPF nomination form. Following a magistrate's order under Section 156(3) of the CrPC, the Bengaluru Police registered an FIR for offences ...

Abuse of Legal Process? : Supreme Court Quashes Second Petition , Not Allowed Without New Grounds

18Aug

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Abuse of Legal Process? : Supreme Court Quashes Second Petition , Not Allowed Without New Grounds

The Supreme Court ruled that a second quashing petition under Section 482 CrPC is impermissible if based on grounds available during the first petition, as it effectively amounts to a review barred under Section 362 CrPC. The Court emphasized that inherent powers cannot override statutory prohibitions, preventing abuse of legal process through successive petitions. The judgment reaffirmed that change in circumstances or new grounds must be demonstrated for entertaining subsequent quashing petitions, ensuring judicial discipline and preventing harassment via repetitive litigation. The High Court's order allowing a second petition was set aside, restoring the criminal complaint for trial. Facts Of The Case: The case involves a dispute between the appellant, M.C. Ravikumar, and the respon...