Vikram Nath Judgment - The Legal Chamber

Supreme Court Quashes FIR in Land Dispute : Civil Dispute or Criminal Case?

14Aug

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Quashes FIR in Land Dispute : Civil Dispute or Criminal Case?

The Supreme Court quashed an FIR under Sections 406 and 420 IPC, ruling that the dispute was purely civil in nature and lacked criminal intent. The Court condemned the misuse of criminal proceedings to pressure the appellants in a land deal, imposing ₹10 lakh costs on the complainant for abuse of legal process. It emphasized that contractual breaches must be resolved through civil remedies, not criminal prosecution, unless fraudulent intent is clearly established. The judgment reaffirmed the need for courts to prevent harassment via frivolous FIRs in commercial disputes. Facts Of The Case: The case involved appellants Mala Choudhary (a 70-year-old widow of an Army officer) and her daughter, who owned a 500-square-yard plot in Telangana. In 2020, they orally agreed to sell the land to a c...

Landmark Ruling: Supreme Court Restores Mother’s Custody Based on Psychological Reports

The Supreme Court exercised its review jurisdiction under Article 137 of the Constitution, emphasizing the limited scope of review and the paramount consideration of the child's welfare in custody matters. The Court recalled its earlier order, restoring custody to the mother while granting visitation rights to the father, citing the child's mental health and stability as decisive factors. The judgment reaffirmed that custody orders are interlocutory and subject to modification based on the child's evolving best interests, aligning with the doctrine of parens patriae. The Court underscored the necessity of a stable environment for the child's holistic development and cautioned against abrupt changes in custody arrangements. Facts Of The Case: The case involves a custody dispute between Ne...

No Civil Suit Barrier: Supreme Court Rules Criminal Trial Must Proceed in Land Scam Case

The Supreme Court held that the High Court erred in quashing criminal proceedings under Sections 120B, 415, and 420 IPC against respondents for allegedly fabricating a partition deed and family tree to exclude daughters from property compensation. It ruled that pendency of civil suits does not bar criminal prosecution if a prima facie case exists. The Court emphasized that criminal conspiracy and cheating must be tried independently, reinstating the trial court’s proceedings. The judgment reaffirms that civil and criminal remedies can coexist, ensuring accountability for fraudulent deprivation of property rights. Facts Of The Case: The case revolves around a dispute over compensation amounting to ₹33 crores awarded by the Bengaluru Metro Rail Corporation for ancestral land purchased by K...