Readiness and Willingness Under Section 16(c) Is Not a Ritualistic Phrase — Plaintiff Must Prove It With Substance, Not Just Words: Karnataka High Court FIR in Disproportionate Assets Case Quashed: Patna High Court Slams SP for 'Non-Application of Mind' and 'Absence of Credible Source Information' Ownership of Vehicle Linked to Commercial Quantity of Heroin – Custodial Interrogation Necessary: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 BNSS Death Caused by Rash Driving Is Not a Private Dispute — No FIR Quashing on Basis of Compromise in Section 106 BNS Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court No Bank Can Override Court Orders: Rajasthan High Court Slams Axis Bank for Unauthorized Withdrawal from Court-Ordered FD" No Work No Pay Is Not a Universal Rule: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dock Identification Without Prior TIP Is Absolutely Useless: P&H High Court Upholds Acquittal in Attempt to Murder Case Filing Forged Court Pleadings in Union Government’s Name is Criminal Contempt: Karnataka High Court Sentences Litigant to Jail Execution of Will Proved, But Probate Justly Denied Due to Concealment of Property Sale: Delhi High Court Mere Designation Doesn’t Establish Criminal Liability: Bombay High Court Quashes Proceedings Against ICICI Officials in Octroi Evasion Case Fraud on Power Voids the Order: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Karnataka BJP Leader R. Ashoka, Slams Politically Motivated Prosecution Cause of Fire Is Immaterial If Fire Itself Is Insured Peril: Supreme Court Rebukes Insurer’s Repudiation Dragging a Trained Army Officer Up 20 Steps Without Resistance? The Story Lacks Credence: Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in Army Officer’s Murder Semen Stains Alone Do Not Prove Rape: Supreme Court Acquits Doctor Accused of Rape No Mortgage, No SARFAESI: Supreme Court Rules Against NEDFi, Says Recovery Action in Nagaland Without Security Agreement Was Illegal Parity Cannot Be Denied by Geography: Supreme Court Holds Jharkhand Bound by Patna HC's Judgment, Orders Pay Revision for Industries Officer Once Power Flows Continuously from a Synchronized Turbine, It Is No Longer Infirm: Supreme Court Orders TANGEDCO to Pay Fixed Charges to Penna Electricity

Criminal Law Cannot Be Misused for Civil Matters: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against MLA in Goa Property Dispute

07 January 2025 8:48 PM

By: sayum


"Criminal Proceedings Should Not Be Initiated to Settle Civil Disputes" –Supreme Court of India quashed an FIR that accused the appellant of cheating under Section 420 of the IPC. The Court held that the allegations stemmed from a property dispute and were civil in nature, with no elements of criminal wrongdoing.

The dispute involved a property in Dhargalim Village, Pernem, Goa. The 4th respondent claimed co-ownership of the land and filed civil suits in 2018 seeking a declaration of ownership. In 2020, two years after the initiation of civil litigation, the respondent alleged that the appellant, acting as a power of attorney holder, sold portions of the property without necessary consent. An FIR was subsequently registered, accusing the appellant of cheating and fraud.

The appellant contested the FIR, claiming that only the rights of his principals were sold, and that the criminal complaint was a mala fide attempt to pressurize him amidst the ongoing civil dispute.

The Supreme Court scrutinized the allegations and concluded that the case was predominantly a civil dispute. The Court noted that the appellant acted as a lawful power of attorney holder and that the allegations did not establish the offence of cheating as defined under Section 415 IPC. The judgment emphasized that:

No Criminal Intent or Deceit
The appellant neither misrepresented ownership nor induced the complainant to deliver property fraudulently. The Court referred to its earlier ruling in Mohd. Ibrahim v. State of Bihar (2009), reiterating that a third party who is not directly affected by a sale deed cannot allege cheating.

Civil Dispute in Progress
The Court highlighted that civil suits concerning the same property had been pending since 2018. The timing of the FIR, two years after the filing of these suits, suggested an attempt to misuse criminal law for gaining leverage in the civil dispute.

Suppression of Material Facts
The complaint failed to disclose the existence of pending civil suits, further indicating a lack of bona fides.

The Court ruled that invoking criminal law in such circumstances amounted to an abuse of the legal process. It quashed FIR No. 177 of 2020 and associated proceedings, while clarifying that the judgment did not affect the merits of the ongoing civil suits.

The Supreme Court’s decision underscores the need to maintain a clear distinction between civil and criminal proceedings. It reaffirms that property disputes, unless involving explicit deceit or fraud, should be addressed through civil remedies and not criminal litigation.

Date of decision : January 6, 2025
 

Latest Legal News