Frivolous Complaints and Abuse of Process: SC Reiterates Principles Under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
- rit arora
- 4 minutes ago
- 3 min read
By Lex Horizon
BACKGROUND OF THE CASE:
The appeal was filed against the order passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Allahabad dated 12.09.2019 by way of which the Petition filed by the Appellant seeking to quash the summoning order passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court no. 08, Allahabad came to be dismissed.
It was the case of the appellant that he was in a consensual relationship with the complainant but things went wrong and they decided to part ways. He also submitted that the complaint came to be lodged only after a long period of 4 (four) years. The appellant further submitted that the complaint lodged by the complainant was nothing but a gross abuse of the process of law. The Complainant ultimately thought of levelling false allegations of the offence punishable under Section 376 of the IPC. The Appellant prayed for the quashing of the criminal proceedings basis the above submissions.
SUPREME COURT’S FOUR STEP TEST FOR QUASHING CRIMINAL CASES
Supreme Court after perusing the record opined that the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate erred in passing the summoning order. It further held that the High Court too overlooked the relevant aspects of the matter while rejecting the application under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. It observed that it was very apparent on the plain reading of the Complaint that it does not aspire confidence. No explanation was offered as to why it took 4 (four) years for the Complainant/Respondent no.2 to file the Complaint. Further, the Complaint fails to disclose the place of the incident or the date of the incident. It also observed that it is by now well settled that summoning any person on the basis of a frivolous or vexatious complaint is something very serious. This would tarnish the image of the person against whom false, frivolous and vexatious allegations are levelled.
Considering the above circumstances, the Hon’ble Supreme Court deemed it fit to provide the following guidelines to determine the veracity of the prayer for quashing raised by the accused by invoking the powers vested in the High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C., which are as follows: -
(i)Step one, whether the material relied upon by the accused is sound, reasonable, and indubitable, i.e., the materials is of sterling and impeccable quality?
(ii) Step two, whether the material relied upon by the accused, would rule out the assertions contained in the charges levelled against the accused, i.e., the material is sufficient to reject and overrule the factual assertions contained in the complaint, i.e., the material is such, as would persuade a reasonable person to dismiss and condemn the factual basis of the accusations as false.
(iii) Step three, whether the material relied upon by the accused, has not been refuted by the prosecution/complainant; and/or the material is such, that it cannot be justifiably refuted by the prosecution/complainant?
(iv) Step four, whether proceeding with the trial would result in an abuse of process of the court, and would not serve the ends of justice?
If the answer to all the steps is in the affirmative, judicial conscience of the High Court should persuade it to quash such criminal – proceedings, in exercise of power vested in it under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. Such exercise of power, besides doing justice to the accused, would save precious court time, which would otherwise be wasted in holding such a trial (as well as, proceedings arising therefrom) specially when, it is clear that the same would not conclude in the conviction of the accused. [(See: Rajiv Thapar & Ors. v. Madan Lal Kapoor (Criminal Appeal No. 174 of 2013)]”
The Hon’ble Supreme Court also made observations regarding the conduct of the Complainant, who thought it fit to not even accept the notice issued by the Court, opining that the Complainant was never serious about the proceedings from the day one. The Hon’ble Court therefore quashed the criminal proceedings instituted against the Appellant considering the same to be a gross abuse of the process of law.
Find the order here
