Proceedings founded on an admitted retaliatory complaint amount to an abuse of process.

Chanchal Kumari filed Complaint Case No. 124 of 2014, alleging, among other things, that the petitioner and co-accused assaulted her and her in-laws, and that property and cash were stolen.

The Magistrate took cognizance under Sections 323, 380 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) on 22 October 2014.

The petitioner challenged that order in revision; the revisional court’s order dated 17 December 2016 was then challenged before the High Court.

The petitioner relied on the complainant’s statement that she had filed the complaint to exert pressure because he had earlier lodged a criminal case against her side.

That earlier case, Rajapakar P.S. Case No. 07 of 2014, had resulted in a charge-sheet against the complainant’s side

Whether, in light of the complainant’s admission that the complaint was filed to pressure the petitioner in response to his earlier case, continuation of the criminal proceedings would amount to an abuse of process

Whether the revisional court’s order concerning the Magistrate’s cognizance order should be quashed

The Court referred to Sections 323, 380 and 504 IPC, under which cognizance had been taken, and to the categories stated in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335, for quashing criminal proceedings.

The governing principle applied was that proceedings may be quashed where, on the circumstances presented, their continuation would constitute an abuse of the process of law.

The Court relied on the complainant’s admission that she filed the complaint to put pressure on the petitioner because he had instituted an earlier case against her side.

It also noted that the earlier case had resulted in a charge-sheet against that side.

In view of this material and the principle in Bhajan Lal, the Court concluded that continuing proceedings against the petitioner would amount to an abuse of process.

Although the petitioner separately challenged the sufficiency of the allegations under Sections 323, 380 and 504 IPC, the Court’s stated basis for its decision was the retaliatory character of the complaint; it did not separately analyse the ingredients of each offence.

It quashed the order dated 17 December 2016 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge-VIII, Hajipur, in Criminal Revision Petition No. 01 of 2015, which concerned the Magistrate’s cognizance order dated 22 October 2014.