₹5.61-Crore Betel-Vine Subsidy Case: Calcutta HC Refuses To Quash Contractor’s Prosecution Over Alleged Fund Diversion

The petitioner sought quashing under Section 482 Cr.P.C. of proceedings arising from Harwood Point Coastal P.S. Case No. 192 of 2022, registered under Sections 409 and 120B IPC.

The prosecution alleged that, in connection with a 2012–2013 government scheme for betel-vine farmers, public subsidies for 204 shade-net-house projects—approximately ₹5.61 crore—were misappropriated through an alleged arrangement involving an NGO and firms controlled by the petitioner.

A charge sheet was filed against him and the NGO’s principal in September 2022.

Section 482 Cr.P.C. preserves the High Court’s inherent power to prevent abuse of process and secure the ends of justice; that power is to be exercised sparingly, and the Court should not conduct a mini-trial or weigh the probative value of evidence at the quashing stage.

The Court considered Sections 468 and 473 Cr.P.C., including the possibility of taking cognizance after limitation where delay is properly explained or extension is necessary in the interests of justice.

It also considered Section 409 IPC, which requires entrustment or dominion over property and criminal breach of trust, and Sections 120A–120B IPC, under which conspiracy requires an agreement to commit an illegal act or an act by illegal means.

Applying Bhajan Lal, Aryan Singh and Awadh Kishore Gupta, among other authorities, the Court held that quashing is inappropriate where the allegations and investigation materials disclose matters requiring trial.

The Court treated the limitation objection as insufficient to warrant quashing, holding that the alleged economic offence involved substantial public funds and that concealment and delay raised questions relevant to extension under Section 473 Cr.P.C.

On the merits, the charge sheet and case diary referred to the alleged collection of signed blank cheques, the routing of funds through accounts controlled by the petitioner’s firms, and witness statements.

The prosecution also disputed the reliability of the inspection and completion records relied on by the petitioner.

The Court considered the petitioner’s role, the alleged fund flows, the validity of the certificates, and the existence of a criminal nexus to be disputed factual matters; assessing them would require a trial rather than a mini-trial under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

It dismissed the revision, vacated any interim stay, and directed the trial court to proceed expeditiously in accordance with law and uninfluenced by the High Court’s observations.