Summary
The Supreme Court restored criminal proceedings arising from an agreement to sell property, holding that civil remedies and arbitration did not by themselves exclude prosecution where the allegations and charge sheet disclosed criminal offences. The High Court had treated the dispute as a mere contractual breach without considering the investigation material. The truth of the allegations and the seller’s documentary defence were matters for trial. The Court declined a further remand and directed expeditious trial independently of its observations.
Issues
- Whether civil or arbitral remedies justified quashing criminal proceedings despite allegations disclosing cheating and criminal breach of trust.
- Whether the High Court could evaluate disputed defences while ignoring the charge sheet.
Provisions considered
- Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973The inherent jurisdiction did not justify terminating a prosecution whose complaint and charge sheet disclosed the alleged offences merely because the transaction also supported civil or arbitral remedies. (¶ 23-36)
Held
- The complaint, FIR, charge sheet and relevant material must be considered on their face to determine whether an offence is disclosed; quashing is not an occasion to decide the truth of disputed allegations through a trial of the defence. (¶¶ 23-31, 35)
- Commercial transactions can involve criminal offences. A contractual remedy or arbitration is not a substitute for prosecution where the factual allegations disclose criminal ingredients, and did not justify quashing this case. (¶ 32-34)
- The High Court ignored the charge sheet despite its being on record. Having examined the record after full argument, the Supreme Court found sufficient material to let the prosecution proceed and declined a remand that would delay trial. (¶ 34-36)
- The respondent’s application for proceedings against the complainant under Sections 340 and 195 was dismissed. The trial court was to proceed independently, uninfluenced by observations made to decide the appeal. (¶ 37-38)
Result
Appeal allowed; High Court quashing order set aside and criminal trial to proceed expeditiously on its own merits. Respondent’s perjury application dismissed.