The Calcutta High Court has quashed an FIR, charge-sheet and consequential criminal proceedings against an advocate arising from a property dispute, holding that continuation of the prosecution would amount to an abuse of the process of law where the dispute is essentially civil and proprietary in nature.
A Single Judge Bench of Justice Uday Kumar was hearing a petition seeking quashing of an FIR registered at New Town Police Station under Sections 420, 406, 448, 427, 506 and 120B IPC, along with the charge-sheet and proceedings pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barasat.
The dispute arose from the transfer of a residential property belonging to a 77-year-old complainant. The complainant had approached an advocate, after allegedly being dispossessed from his property. A registered General Power of Attorney was subsequently executed in favour of petitioner’s office clerk. Within 24 hours, the clerk executed a registered sale deed transferring the property to the Advocate. The complainant later alleged that the advocate forcibly took possession of the property and caused damage to portions of the structure, leading to registration of the criminal case.
The petitioner contended that the dispute was fundamentally civil in nature and that the essential ingredient of cheating, dishonest inducement from the inception was absent. The Court noted that a civil suit concerning the property was already pending and that the Civil Court, after examining the financial transactions and other material, had not found a prima facie case of fraud at that stage and had protected the petitioner’s possession by injunction.
The High Court reiterated that although civil and criminal remedies may coexist, criminal proceedings cannot be used as a pressure tactic or shortcut for resolving civil property and contractual disputes. Relying on the Supreme Court’s decisions, the Court held that criminal prosecution cannot continue where the foundational ingredients of the alleged offence are absent.
Also Read Delhi HC Directs Centre to Decide on SOP for Police Body-Worn Cameras Within 6 Months
The Court observed that the transaction was founded on registered instruments and that the record contained bank statements, payment directions and money receipts evidencing monetary transactions. Since the Civil Court was already seized of the issues concerning title, validity of the deeds and the civil consequences of the transaction, allowing a parallel criminal prosecution on the same allegations could result in conflicting outcomes.
Holding that the dispute was quintessentially civil and proprietary in character, and that the absence of clear ingredients of cheating under Section 420 IPC deprived the prosecution of its foundational basis, the Court held that continuation of the criminal proceedings was wholly unwarranted and amounted to an abuse of the process of the Court.
Accordingly, the High Court quashed the FIR, charge-sheet and entire criminal proceedings against the advocate. There was no order as to costs.
