The Division Bench of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in a judgment titled "Ramesh vs State of Maharasthra & Anr.", bearing Criminal Application No. 2810 of 2021, while quashing an F.I.R. bearing No. 401/2021 dated 13.10.2021 registered under sections 385, 341, 323, 504, 506, 507 read with 34 of I.P.C. to the extent of the Applicant therein, has opined that when there is the use of criminal law in the backdrop of civil disputes and when the proceedings are initiated with an ulterior motive, it amounts to abuse of process of law.
Brief Facts:
1. The complaint was registered by one Mr. Laxman alleging that
his father, his stepbrother, and his relatives were pressurizing
him into selling his ancestral land and self-acquired property and
giving Rs.60,00,000/- to them by issuing life threats and
blackmailing him.
2. That on 12.10.2021, the complainant was returning from Newasa on
his motorbike at night when the vehicle was intercepted by his
father and his stepbrother. The complainant alleged that his father
and stepbrother gave him fist and kick blows and continuously
demanded Rs.60 Lakhs from him. It is also alleged that the father
and the stepbrother threatened the complainant that if he does not
meet their demands, false cases would be lodged against him, apart
from issuing life threats.
3. Accordingly, the above-mentioned F.I.R. was registered at the
behest of the Complainant against the father, the stepbrother, the
step brother-in-law and a relative of the step-brother-in-law (the
applicant in the present case) for the alleged offenses took place
on the night of 12.10.2021.
Issues:-
1. Can a criminal proceeding be initiated with ulterior motive
when there is a blend of civil disputes pending between the
parties?
2. If there is no material against the accused person and he/she is
named as an accused person in the F.I.R., can the criminal
proceedings be continued against him/her?
3. Can a complaint which is a counterblast to the civil disputes
between parties be tenable in eyes of law?
Court Observations:-
1. After scrutinization of documents along with the F.I.R., the
Hon'ble Division Bench opined that there is an ancestral land
in the picture and dispute regarding the same is pending before the
civil court. On examination of the complaint, it was observed that
no overt act whatsoever was attributed to the applicant, who
happens to be the relative of step brother-in-law, in the incident
which took place on the night of 12.10.2021 and still he was named
as an accused in the complaint along with others.
2. The Hon'ble court held that since there is a blend of civil
cases pending before the civil courts and there is also a case
pending from the applicant's side against the complainant, the
present F.I.R. is a result of counterblast and is a mere
afterthought.
3. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court relied upon the ratio laid
down by the Hon'ble Apex court in various landmark judgments
and held that when there is use of criminal law in the backdrop of
civil disputes and when it is clear that the proceedings are
initiated with ulterior motive, it amounts to gross abuse of
process.
4. The Hon'ble Division Bench relied upon the case of M. Suresh
& Ors. Vs State of Andhra Pradesh & Anr.1
wherein the Hon'ble Supreme court observed that process of
criminal law cannot be present into service merely for settling a
civil dispute when no offence is committed. Further, reliance was
placed upon the case of Chandran Ratnaswami vs K.C. Palanisamy
& Ors.2 wherein the Hon'ble Supreme court has
observed that there is an impression that civil law remedies are
time-consuming and do not adequately protect the interests of
lenders/creditors. Therefore, it is the duty and obligation of the
criminal court to exercise a great deal of caution in issuing the
process, particularly when matters are essentially of civil
nature.
5. The reliance was also placed on the judgment of Inder Mohan
Goswami3 wherein the Hon'ble Apex court referred to
various judgments including the landmark judgment passed in State
of Haryana & Ors. Vs Bhajan Lal & Ors.4 Where it
has been observed that the dispute in question was purely of civil
nature and initiating criminal proceedings was clearly an abuse of
the process of the Court.
6. In the present dispute, the Hon'ble Bombay High Court found
it transparent and clear that there is a history of civil dispute
between the complainant, his father and his step brother. The
present applicant is not in close relation with either the
complainant or the other accused. It was further observed that no
role was attributed pertaining to the present applicant, however,
still his name is inserted in the F.I.R. without attributing any
overt act to him.
Conclusion
After taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case and aligning them with the necessary judicial precedents, it was opined by the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court that continuation of criminal proceedings against the applicant would amount to sheer abuse of process of law. In view of the same, F.I.R. in question and the proceedings emanating therefrom were quashed and set-aside, only to the extent if the applicant.
Footnotes
1. (2018) 15 SCC 273
2. (2013) 6 SCC 740
3. (2007) 12 SCC 1
4. AIR 1992 SC 604
For further information please contact at S.S Rana & Co. email: info@ssrana.in or call at (+91- 11 4012 3000). Our website can be accessed at www.ssrana.in
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
