Criminal proceedings founded on mala fide, absurd allegations in family disputes warrant quashing under Section 482 CrPC.

The petitioners, nine members of the same family, invoked Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking quashing of Durgapur Police Station Case No. 470 of 2021, corresponding to G.R. Case No. 1666 of 2021 and subsequently G.R. Case No. 1489 of 2023/Sessions Case No. 19 of 2022.

The proceeding arose from a family dispute concerning the issuance of a No-Objection Certificate for compassionate employment after the death of the parties’ common father, an employee of South Eastern Coalfields Limited.

According to the petitioners, they visited the opposite parties’ residence to request the NOC. The complainant alleged that the petitioners unlawfully entered the premises, assaulted opposite party no. 3 with iron rods and wooden sticks, attempted to kill him, and snatched a gold mangalsutra from opposite party no. 2.

The police registered offences under Sections 448, 323, 325, 307, 379, 506 and 34 IPC. An initial chargesheet was filed against all nine petitioners.

During consideration of the charges, the Sessions Court observed that the injuries were simple and that the ingredients of Section 307 IPC were not attracted.

Further investigation was thereafter conducted, including forensic examination of a video recording. The CFSL opined that the video was continuous and unedited. A supplementary chargesheet was subsequently filed, again invoking Sections 448, 323, 325, 307, 379, 506, 34 and 120B IPC.

Charges had been framed and the case was at the evidence stage when the petition under Section 482 CrPC was heard.

Whether the allegations in the FIR and chargesheet, even if accepted at face value, disclosed genuine cognizable offences or were so absurd, inherently improbable, and mala fide as to constitute an abuse of the process of law warranting interference under Section 482 CrPC?

Whether the prosecution of all nine family members through the mechanical invocation of Section 34 IPC, without specific attribution of overt acts, could be sustained?

Whether the continuation of the criminal proceeding, arising out of a family dispute concerning compassionate employment, amounted to misuse of criminal law for settling a civil or domestic dispute?

The Court exercised the inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of the process of court and secure the ends of justice.

Relying on State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, particularly the categories concerning mala fide proceedings and allegations that are absurd or inherently improbable, the Court held that criminal proceedings may be quashed where no prudent person could conclude that sufficient grounds exist for proceeding.

It referred to Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra for the principle that quashing powers must be exercised sparingly but remain available where criminal proceedings are used as instruments of harassment in private disputes.

Under Kahkashan Kausar v. State of Bihar, omnibus allegations against several family members without distinct factual attribution are insufficient; and under Suresh v. State of U.P., common intention under Section 34 IPC requires a factual foundation establishing shared criminal design and participation.

The Court also relied on Pepsi Foods Ltd. v. Special Judicial Magistrate for the requirement of judicial application of mind before summoning or taking cognizance, and on Naresh Aneja v. State of Uttar Pradesh for the principle that criminal intimidation under Sections 503/506 IPC requires a real threat intended to cause alarm, rather than casual or exaggerated allegations arising from domestic discord.

The Court found that the prosecution arose against the backdrop of a family dispute over a compassionate-appointment NOC, giving the proceeding a predominantly domestic and civil character.

It considered the allegation that elderly persons, women, and persons accompanying small children had arrived with heavy weapons, carried out a murderous assault, and then remained at the scene until the police arrived to be inherently improbable.

The simple nature of the injuries and the earlier judicial observation that Section 307 IPC was not attracted further weakened the allegation of an attempt to murder.

The Court also held that the indiscriminate application of Section 34 IPC to all nine petitioners, without clear and individualized allegations of participation, was inconsistent with the principles in Kahkashan Kausar and Suresh.

On the cumulative assessment of the family dispute, alleged exaggeration, absence of a credible foundation for the graver offences, and alleged misuse of influence and criminal machinery, the Court concluded that continuation of the prosecution would amount to abuse of process.

C.R.R. No. 1632 of 2024 was accordingly allowed.

The entire proceeding arising from Durgapur Police Station Case No. 470 of 2021, including G.R. Case No. 1666 of 2021, its subsequent numbering as G.R. Case No. 1489 of 2023, Sessions Case No. 19 of 2022, the chargesheets, and all consequential orders, was quashed and set aside as against all the petitioners.

Interim orders, if any, were vacated, with no order as to costs.