FIR can be quashed under Section 482 CrPC even after filing of a charge sheet, Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has held that High Court’s power under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 can be exercised to quash an FIR even after the filing of a charge sheet..“There is nothing in the words of this Section which restricts the exercise of the power of the Court to prevent the abuse of process of court or miscarriage of justice only to the stage of the FIR. It is settled principle of law that the High court can exercise jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C even when the discharge application is pending with the trial court.”, the Court has stated..The judgment was delivered by a Division Bench of Justice SA Bobde and Justice L Nageswara Rao in a Special Leave Petition against an order of the Delhi High Court which had dismissed the petition filed by the Appellants under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code to quash an FIR registered against them..The FIR pertained to disputes arising out of a development agreement between the Appellant, Anand Kumar and the complainant, Ansal Properties & Infrastructure Ltd. The property belonged to the Appellant but was subsequently transferred to the Appellant’s wife. Pursuant to the development agreement, Ansal Properties paid Rs. 1 crore to the Appellant..The agreement, however, could not be fulfilled due to the new building regulations for the area where the property was situated. Consequently, the Appellant wrote a letter stating that he did not wish to develop the property, but did not take any further action to return the amount of Rs. 1 crore advanced by Ansal Properties.. Subsequently, an FIR was lodged by Ansal Properties against the Appellant and his wife..The High Court disposed of the Appellants’ petition filed under Section 482 on the ground that it was filed prematurely, and directed the investigation to proceed further. Thereafter, an appeal was preferred by the Appellant and his wife by way of Special Leave Petition..While the appeal was pending before the Supreme Court, a charge sheet was filed before the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate, Patiala House Court, Delhi against the Appellant and his wife for the offence of criminal breach of trust. Thus, by way of amendment to the main prayer in the appeal, the Appellants prayed for quashing of charge sheet as well, along with the FIR..It was argued by Ansal that the petition for quashing of FIR was “untenable” since the proceedings had gone past the stage of FIR and had resulted in a charge sheet..Rejecting the argument, the Court observed that,.“Indeed, it would be a travesty to hold that proceedings initiated against a person can be interfered with at the stage of FIR but not if it has advanced, and the allegations have materialized into a charge sheet. On the contrary it could be said that the abuse of process caused by FIR stands aggravated if the FIR has taken the form of a charge sheet after investigation.”.The power (under Section 482 of the Code) is undoubtedly conferred to prevent abuse of process of power of any court, it further said..The Court further held that the charge was “wholly untenable and rather extraordinary“. It noted that the alleged fraudulent transfer of property by the Appellant to his wife, even if assumed to be illegal, “by no stretch of imagination can constitute the offence of a criminal breach of trust“, since the property belonged to Appellant..There was no question of Appellant having been entrusted with their own property, and that too by the complainant, who had merely entered into a development agreement in respect of the property, it further iterated..“We do not see how it can be contended by any stretch of imagination that the Appellants have misappropriated the amount or dishonestly used the amount contrary to any law or contract. In any case, we find that the dispute has the contours of a dispute of civil nature and does not constitute a criminal offence.”, the Court asserted..It, therefore, stated that the High Court erred in dismissing the petition of the Appellants filed under Section 482 as it was a fit case for the High Court to exercise its inherent power to quash the FIR..It further noted that the prosecution was “mala fide, untenable and solely intended to harass the Appellants“, and quashed the FIR and the charge sheet filed against the Appellant and his wife..The Court thus decreed,.“For the aforesaid reasons, we hereby set aside the impugned judgment and order dated 02.02.2016 of High Court of Delhi. Accordingly, appeal is allowed along with the application filed by the Appellants seeking amendment of main prayer.”.The Appellants were represented by Senior Advocates Mahesh Jethmalani and R Basant and Advocate Ravi Sharma briefed by a team from Karanjawala & Co. led by Senior Partner Sandeep Kapur and Partner Debmalya Banerjee..The Complainant was represented by Senior Advocate Sanjiv Sen..Read the Judgement: