SUPREME COURT REITRATED IN ONE OF THE CASE, ORDERING THE HIGH COURT TO QUASH FIR EVEN IF CHARGESHEET IS FILED
Category: Criminal Law
「 ✦ Content ✦ 」
This order has been passed in A. M. Mohan v/s The State represented by SHO & Anr case. The supreme court has heard the matter in which the appellant has filed a petition in the madras high court in criminal OP No.20716/2020 and Crl M.P No.8763/2020, seeking to call for records and quash Crime No. 21 of 2020 FIR registered at the office of the SHO, District Crime Branch, Kancheepuram under 420 r/w 34 IPC 1860.
FACTUAL NOTION-
The prosecution claims that in 2016, the second accused approached the complainant, a college friend, to help him in clearing his hand loan, stating business involvement with the first accused. The complainant transferred accused persons money totally amounting to Rs.1,60,01,000 by various modes. The first accused executed a registered mortgage deed in favour of the complainant. Further, the complainant executed an agreement and paid Rs.2,00,00,000 for the purpose of land purchase in which the sale was registered in the name of first accused by executing Power of Attorney registered and sale deed in favour of the complainant respectively.
Accused No. 1 has executed mortgage of 2.14 acres of land and taken huge money, returned back some and did not repay the rest as per allegation. The accused also did gold chit business with the complainant and defrauded him according to the allegations of a huge amount of money. This resulted in filing a case by the complainant before the Judicial Magistrate, for which cognizance was taken resulting in registration of the FIR against the accused for several offenses. Notably, the present appellant had no direct dealing with the complainant. Accused No. 1 was the brain behind the financial irregularities, and the appellant's role was only to transfer funds and thereafter execute documents.
The appellant cannot be said to have enticed any transaction because there was no direct dealing between the appellant and the complainant. The appellant received money and executed a sale deed but was not involved in the events that followed. Therefore, the FIR and charge-sheet do not support the accusation of Section 420 of IPC against the appellant.
CONCLUSION-
The court recently used its power under Article 142 of the Constitution to quash the FIR, charge-sheet, and all other proceedings against the appellant, stating that continuing the proceedings would be an abuse of the process of law and the court. The High Court's order dated 15th July 2022 in Criminal O.P. No. 20716 of 2020 and Criminal M.P. No. 8763 of 2020 has been set aside. The FIR in Crime No.21 of 2020 and the consequential charge-sheet against the appellant are also quashed and set aside.
OLQ is a Pan-India basis law firm connecting legal expertise nationwide.
WRITTEN BY: ALOK CHHAPARWAL
GUIDED BY: ADVOCATE ANIK
