Tag: Section 482 CrPC

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 ...
Read More
Can’t Go Straight to the Magistrate? Supreme Court Explains the Right Way to File an FIR When Police Refuse
23Aug By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Can’t Go Straight to the Magistrate? Supreme Court Explains the Right Way to File an FIR When Police Refuse

The Supreme Court upheld that a Magistrate's order under Section 156(3) CrPC directing FIR registration, even if passed without the informant first approaching the Superintendent of Police, is a mere procedural irregularity and not illegal. The Court affirmed that such an order must be a reasoned one reflecting application of mind, and refused to quash the FIR at the chargesheet stage, leaving the matter for trial. Facts Of The Case: Based on a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) from 1995, a financial dispute arose between M/s Sunair Hotels Ltd. (SHL) and VLS Finance Ltd. (VLS). SHL alleged that VLS officials had fraudulently induced them into the agreement by promising a public issue that was impossible under SEBI guidelines. After VLS filed several criminal complaints against SHL for fi...
Read More
Supreme Court Clarifies Limits of SC/ST Act: No Prosecution Without Caste-Based Intent
18Aug By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Clarifies Limits of SC/ST Act: No Prosecution Without Caste-Based Intent

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the High Court's quashing of proceedings under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. It ruled that mere allegations of caste-based malice were insufficient without concrete evidence. The Court emphasized that prosecution under the Act requires proof of intent linked to the victim's caste, preventing misuse for personal vendettas. Legal infirmities in the complaint and lack of prima facie case justified the quashing under Section 482 CrPC. Facts Of The Case: The case originated from a land allotment dispute in Duvva village, where the appellant, Konde Nageshwar Rao, alleged that Respondent No. 2, the Mandal Revenue Officer (MRO), manipulated the allotment of plots reserved for Scheduled Caste (SC) beneficiaries to upper-caste ind...
Read More
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...
Read More
Conspiracy in Construction: Supreme Court Slams Builder & Officials for Violating Zoning Rules
8Aug By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Conspiracy in Construction: Supreme Court Slams Builder & Officials for Violating Zoning Rules

The Supreme Court dismissed the appellant's appeal, upholding the Kerala High Court's decision to proceed with criminal charges under Section 13(1)(d) r/w Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, and Section 120-B IPC (criminal conspiracy). The Court ruled that obtaining a fraudulent permit for illegal construction in a prohibited zone constituted a criminal conspiracy with municipal officials. The attempt to regularise the unauthorised building did not absolve the appellant of liability. The Court distinguished the architect's case, noting lack of active involvement in the conspiracy. Charges were affirmed, emphasising strict enforcement of anti-corruption laws. Facts Of The Case: The case involves G. Mohandas, the owner of a building in Vanchiyoor Village, Thiruvanantha...
Read More
Supreme Court Explains : When Can Courts Quash Serious Crimes?
5Aug By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Explains : When Can Courts Quash Serious Crimes?

The Supreme Court, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC, quashed criminal proceedings—including a non-compoundable offense under Section 376 IPC—based on an amicable settlement between the parties. The Court emphasized that while such offenses are grave, exceptional circumstances (victim’s unequivocal settlement, societal harmony, and futility of trial) justified judicial intervention to prevent abuse of process. The ruling reaffirms that ends of justice override rigid legal constraints in unique cases. Facts Of The Case: The case arose from two FIRs registered in November 2023 at Mehunbare Police Station, Jalgaon. The first FIR (No. 302/2023) was filed against Madhukar and others under Sections 324, 143, 147, 452, and others of the IPC, alleging they assaulted a woman a...
Read More
Supreme Court :Threats Alone Can Constitute Extortion “No Need for Money Exchange”| Section 387 IPC
18Jun By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court :Threats Alone Can Constitute Extortion “No Need for Money Exchange”| Section 387 IPC

The Supreme Court of India ruled that for a prosecution under Section 387 IPC, the delivery of property is not necessary, as this section punishes the act of putting a person in fear of death or grievous hurt "in order to commit extortion," which is a stage prior to the actual commission of extortion. The High Court's quashing order was set aside because it wrongly emphasized the non-delivery of money, which is not an essential ingredient for an offense under Section 387 IPC. Facts Of The Case: The case involves an appeal filed by M/s. Balaji Traders (appellant-complainant) against a High Court judgment dated June 28, 2024, which quashed a summoning order and proceedings in Complaint Case No. 58 of 2022 under Section 387 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The complainant, Prof. Manoj Kumar ...
Read More
Bank’s Gold Revaluation Under Scrutiny: Supreme Court Allows Trial Against Bank Officials
18Jun By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Bank’s Gold Revaluation Under Scrutiny: Supreme Court Allows Trial Against Bank Officials

The Supreme Court of India allowed the appeal by Abhishek Singh, holding that the High Court improperly quashed the FIR filed by him. The High Court erred by considering extraneous documents and evaluating the merits of the case at the quashing stage, rather than determining if a prima facie offense was made out. The proceedings from the FIR are revived, and the guilt or innocence of the respondents is to be established at trial. Facts Of The Case: Abhishek Singh, the appellant, a businessman, secured a loan of ₹7,70,000 from the Bank of India on July 22, 2020, by pledging 254 grams of 22-carat gold ornaments. According to Singh, he repaid the loan, including interest, by March 31, 2023, after receiving a notice from the bank on October 7, 2022, to pay ₹8,01,383.59. However, unbeknownst ...
Read More
Supreme Court Exposes False Allegations, Quashes FIR in Sexual Assault Case
13Jun By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Exposes False Allegations, Quashes FIR in Sexual Assault Case

The Supreme Court of India quashed FIRs No. 103 of 2022 and 751 of 2021, and all consequent proceedings, finding no prima facie material to substantiate allegations of cheating or sexual intercourse under false promise of marriage. The Court noted inherent contradictions in the complaints and found the complainant's allegations to be fabricated and malicious, indicating manipulative and vindictive tendencies. Facts Of The Case: The case involves Batlanki Keshav (Kesava) Kumar Anurag, the appellant, challenging an order from the High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad, which rejected his petition to quash FIR No. 103 of 2022. This FIR, registered at Madhapur Police Station, Cyberabad, alleges offenses under Section 376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and Section 3(2)(v)...
Read More
Fraud Case Closed: Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Accused After Bank Settlement
13Jun By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Fraud Case Closed: Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Accused After Bank Settlement

The Supreme Court quashed criminal proceedings under Sections 120B, 420, 468, and 471 IPC, and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, against the appellants. This decision was based on a comprehensive One Time Settlement with the Bank, full repayment of dues, and dismissal of recovery proceedings. The Court noted that continuing the proceedings would serve no purpose, especially given similar cases against co-accused were also quashed on grounds of settlement Facts Of The Case: N.S. Gnaneshwaran and N.S. Madanlal, accused nos. 3 and 6 respectively, are the appellants in this case. They were facing criminal proceedings in C.C. No. 16 of 2006, arising from FIR No. RC MA1 2005 0020, based on a complaint lodged by respondent no.2 - Bank on April 27, 2...
Read More