Courts Responsible To Prevent Criminal Action Against Innocents, Must Proceed With Circumspection When Malicious Prosecution Alleged: Jharkhand HC

The Jharkhand High Court has quashed criminal proceedings in a case deemed maliciously filed, emphasising that when a case is filed with malicious intent and subsequently challenged in the High Court, it bears a greater responsibility to scrutinise the matter meticulously to prevent the wrongful prosecution of an innocent person.

Justice Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi remarked, “There is no doubt that if a case is made out, the High Court is required to proceed with circumspection and with all care for quashing of the proceeding as has been submitted by the learned counsel for the O.P.No.2 but at the same time, if maliciously the case is filed and that is challenged in the High Court, the High Court is having more responsibility to examine the same with circumspection so that an innocent person may not be prosecuted in a criminal case.”

“If a person decides to file a malicious case, every care is being taken in drafting of the complaint petition as well as in the contents of the FIR so that the ingredients of the sections may be made out and if such situation is there, the Court is required to read the things in between the lines,” Justice Dwivedi noted.

The case in question involved a complaint alleging that the complainant's demand for the partition of ancestral property angered the accused persons, leading to an incident where the accused allegedly assaulted the complainant and his wife and stole money and valuables. The petitioner sought the quashing of the entire criminal proceedings, arguing that even individuals residing in Delhi and NOIDA were implicated without basis and that the dispute was fundamentally a property issue with no injury report.

The Petitioner contended that even the persons who are residing at Delhi, Noida, respectively have also been implicated in the case. It was furthermore contended that there exists a property dispute between the parties and there is no injury report.

The opposite party No.2, contended that there were ongoing cases between the parties in different jurisdictions and urged that the High Court should be slow in quashing the petition if a case is made out.

Upon reviewing the facts, the Court concluded, “Coming to the facts of the present case, what has been recorded hereinabove, clearly suggest that maliciously the present case has been filed against the petitioner.”

The Court further remarked, “In view of above, to allow the present proceeding to continue further will amount to abuse of the process of law,” and subsequently quashed the entire criminal proceedings, including the order taking cognizance, thus allowing the criminal miscellaneous petition.

Case Title: Awadh Kishore Lal Vs The State of Jharkhand and Another

LL Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Jha) 97

Click Here To Download Judgement