Case Note & Summary
The High Court quashed criminal proceedings against the Applicants in a case involving alleged offences related to prohibited cotton seeds. The Applicants, proprietors of Suraj Agro Agency, were chargesheeted based on a co-accused's statement that they supplied fertilisers, but no contraband was seized from them. The Court found that the allegations did not meet the essential ingredients for cheating under Section 420 IPC, as there was no fraudulent or dishonest inducement to deliver property, nor did they constitute forgery offences under Sections 463, 465, 468, 471 IPC, due to lack of specific allegations of false document preparation with intent to cause damage or fraud. Citing Supreme Court precedent, the Court held that the chargesheet failed to prima facie establish the offences, leading to quashment to prevent abuse of legal process.
Headnote
The High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench, heard a Criminal Application filed by the Applicants seeking quashment of Regular Criminal Case No. 83/2019 pending before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ralegaon, District Yavatmal, and Chargesheet No. 216/2019 dated 5/10/2019 arising from Crime No. 161/2018 registered at Police Station, Wadki, for offences under Sections 420, 463, 465, 468, 471 of Indian Penal Code (IPC) read with Section 15 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, Sections 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 of Seeds Act, 1968, Rule 7 of Seeds Rules, 1976, Sections 2(8), 12 of Maharashtra Cotton Seeds (Regulation of Supply, Distribution, Sale and Fixation of Sale Price) Act, 2009, Sections 3, 9(c), 10(ch) of Cotton Seeds Rule, 2010, and Sections 3, 7, 8, 9, 10 of Essential Commodities Act, 1955 -- The Applicants contended that no contraband articles were seized from them, and the allegations, based solely on a co-accused's statement that fertilisers were supplied by them, did not constitute the offences as charged -- The prosecution case involved a raid on Accused No.1's house where prohibited cotton seeds were seized, and based on his statement that he purchased them from the Applicants' shop, M/s Suraj Agro Agency, the Applicants were chargesheeted, though no prohibited seeds were found during the raid on their shop -- The Court examined the ingredients of Section 420 IPC, noting that cheating requires fraudulent or dishonest inducement to deliver property, as per Section 415 IPC, and found no such allegations against the Applicants -- For forgery offences under Sections 463, 465, 468, 471 IPC, the Court held that specific allegations of preparing false documents with intent to cause damage or commit fraud were absent -- Relying on the Supreme Court judgment in Deepak Gaba and Others V/s State of Uttar Pradesh and Another, (2023) 3 Supreme Court Cases 423, which clarified the conditions for offences under Sections 420 and 471 IPC, the Court concluded that the chargesheet failed to establish the necessary elements -- Consequently, the Court quashed the criminal proceedings against the Applicants, holding that continuing them would amount to an abuse of process of law
Premium Content
The Headnote is only available to subscribed members.
Subscribe Now to access key legal points
Issue of Consideration: Whether the allegations in the chargesheet make out offences under Sections 420, 463, 465, 468, 471 of Indian Penal Code and other Acts to sustain criminal proceedings against the Applicants
Premium Content
The Issue of Consideration is only available to subscribed members.
Subscribe Now to access critical case issues
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the application and quashed Regular Criminal Case No. 83/2019 and Chargesheet No. 216/2019 against the Applicants, holding that the allegations did not prima facie constitute the offences charged and continuing proceedings would be an abuse of process of law
