Summary
The Supreme Court quashed a complaint alleging assault and sexual misconduct arising amid a longstanding family property dispute. Considering the sequence of events, contemporaneous preventive proceedings, delay in approaching the criminal court and defects in the summoning analysis, it found malicious prosecution falling within category seven of Bhajan Lal. The police inquiry report was considered only for chronology, and rejection of an earlier request for police investigation did not itself bar a private complaint.
Issues
- Whether the complaint constituted malicious prosecution warranting exercise of inherent powers.
- Whether rejection of the earlier investigation application prevented a later private complaint.
Held
- Inherent jurisdiction must be exercised cautiously to prevent abuse and secure justice, including where material shows criminal proceedings were maliciously instituted to pursue a private grudge. The High Court must assess the relevant facts rather than merely cite the governing precedent. (¶¶ 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 23)
- Rejection of an application under Section 156(3) does not preclude a complaint under Section 200. The inquiry report here was considered only to establish the sequence of events, not as substantive proof of its account. (¶¶ 18, 19)
- The pre-existing property dispute, police intervention and preventive proceedings at the time, the interval before the investigation application, and the summoning court’s rejection of one alleged episode supported the finding of ulterior motive. The summoning court had also overlooked the civil suit. On these particular facts continued prosecution would be abuse. (¶¶ 17, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24)
Result
Appeal allowed; criminal proceedings initiated by Complaint Case No. 1 of 2017, Sajjad Quraishi v. Anwarul Haq Quraishi, quashed.