Disputed factual questions supported by charge-sheet material cannot be resolved in Section 482 quashing proceedings.

In Crl.P. No. 7278/2019, the petitioner sought to quash proceedings arising from a private complaint alleging that she threw a coconut at a lorry on 10 March 2019, breaking its window and causing damage valued at Rs.15,000.

Following a reference under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., police investigated and filed a charge sheet for offences under Sections 427 and 504 IPC.

In connected Crl.P. No. 5008/2019, the petitioners sought to quash proceedings arising from a complaint alleging that they poured water on raw materials on 1 July 2018, causing loss of Rs.24,000; the charge sheet invoked Sections 427, 503 and 506 IPC.

The petitioners argued that the complaints were retaliatory, pointing to earlier complaints they had made about alleged nuisance caused by the complainant’s business and to discrepancies in the prosecution materials.

In both matters, the Magistrate had referred the complaints to police for investigation, and charge sheets were filed.

1. Whether the proceedings in Crl.P. No. 7278/2019 should be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. on the ground that the complaint and charge-sheet material did not disclose the alleged offences or that the complaint was retaliatory.

2. Whether the proceedings in Crl.P. No. 5008/2019 should be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. where the petitioners disputed the allegations, the timing and witness statements, and the sufficiency of the material to establish the alleged offences.

The Court considered its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and the procedural route under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., by which a Magistrate may refer a complaint to police for investigation.

It applied the principle that disputed questions of fact—including challenges to witness accounts, timing, and the circumstances in which a complaint was made—are matters for trial and cannot be resolved in Section 482 proceedings.

The alleged offences were under Sections 427 and 504 IPC in Crl.P. No. 7278/2019 and Sections 427, 503 and 506 IPC in Crl.P. No. 5008/2019.

The Court found that the first charge sheet relied on witnesses, including eyewitnesses and mahazar witnesses, as well as photographs and a repair bill concerning the lorry’s broken glass; the petitioners’ challenge to the lorry’s registration number could be tested at trial.

In the second matter, the charge sheet cited eyewitnesses and mahazar witnesses and included supporting documents; disputes about timing, witness statements, the alleged damage, and whether the offences’ ingredients were established were likewise for trial.

Although the petitioners relied on their earlier complaints to support their claim of an oblique motive, the Court held that this disputed factual contention could not justify quashing in light of the prosecution material.

Both criminal petitions were dismissed, leaving the proceedings to continue before the trial court.