Lalit Taneja And ORS v. State Of Punjab And ANR
!"# $%&%!'()*)* ,% ' - '# '! . / ))) % %!' /&
0 /&1&
!"1'- 2 '# '! . / ))) &3!'# ' &
( 4+
)
!
"#$% !
#'
!
"#$% !
"( #'
!
"#$% !
)
!
"#$%
* ** !
"#$%
(
( !
""!
, -
*!
"#$%
'# .
5)
/
!
*#
0 #
%#
!
. 4
0 !
#
5
3
*
- !
% 7#
*
** -1
'%# +
- + % *$ '' '
9 :#%'
*
#% %'
3#
#
- '$ %# $ % ' /
% %* % #!
%#!
#$*'#
&#
8
$ % & -#
-$ %'
9 :#
$ %
&-/ (/ *
%*# '
'* ; %* < '
$/ % *% 9%* & '$ ## 3 #% '
&
#'# ++ #%
'*
!
&
%
%*!
$#
&
= -+ '*
%%#
, !
&
> * %'
'' %#
'$ $ % %'
& 1 #
'' $ %
1 ' %* "
?%#
-&
%%# , #& ,
# 8 !
& & @ % #
A# /!
'% $*/!
%'
/ " '
!
%* '
$ %
&
'*#
%* "%%# # 8
#/
-#
'' !
#'*/ +** - !
%* %
%%#
'
# ( %*
'
' %*
%%# &
** ' !
('
'$ ++ $ % "
=!45!5509
$
%%# ' %1
**
&( 1 '
/ '
%1 & #*/ % #
%%# ' >&$!
%%# '$ $ %
'
'''
+ #
/
5
+
** #
-
"!
' & & '*/ %'
*
5
%%# %*
2+
(& ' &
*
%%'
"%%# B& ( 0
',%!
** &( !
0
# #$ %!
#
%
0 **
-%
% 8/ +#
%*
(
#!
+!
' /# (
%
!
+ # # 0
0
' *# #
# * # %* / **/
'*
,
&(
%'
*$
*#
# %*
* & %*
++
%* ' %'
/
&(
(
!
(
&
%*!
!
7#
"
% ++%
$ %%#
' % * . '
* '
%* " %!
1 %*
'# :$ & !
$
'-
% # + &
** #*/ (
'* '# '*
+
*+
/
?'* #* /
$ 8 + +/
!
* # %* * # '
! #"# $
0
%& '( )*!* + ,
=
3
+
# '#
%'
#
$ ' #
#
# ' # +
0!
%*!
''%
% #
'*/ %'
''%
% . / #
*
%* 8@ + '#%#
'# . - **
'% # %
C %
'#%# '# & %*
'% #
%#
*
# (
% ++%
5
3
%
%'
%/ -&
%
%%# % + 8
-#
*/
'-
*/
- '% &
'#
'* **/ '
% # *#
$
- / ( /
#
%'
*/ +* ++## % ==!
%'
#
"? 4
$(
- %* &
?%# -&
%'
- - !
#
#$
**&#
'#
'# %'*
!
=
*# '
'* !
& '*
(
%$#
' /# + 3
#
* #
%*!
# * # %* '# !
'%
*$**#
%- + $ #%
%**%# 3$
++ % #
$
!
%*
% %%# 3
+
#
*$**#
++ (
$ /
*$**#
#
& ( '*
-+ * #
#
E
- #
$ # #* -
" !
** '+ *(
%'
- F '&
0
!" #"
%
'*
$ ,#
'% >F-*
'
&**
++ > &** *# ''
?%
'&
0 !
>
?'%#
*/A
** %!
&
'* %# -+ >
'& %+# %
$/ '% % 8 %
# , %!
'$
- '% (
%
#
/ % /
++%
# #!
%
'& ?% # '$
- '% >F-*
' # & '
#*
/
** %% ?%
'&
0 '$
- '%
%
# ,
++%
# "
%*-
'% '
- # " ' .** /(( ,,!!
& >F-*
'
%# ++ & '&
0
%*# ?% # '$
- '%
& % # , %!
& * -$
' / #&
'% !
%* */ #+ #!
++ */ * A#!
+*?
#*
+*
?
/
( & % '& *# ?% # +**&
' % '* %**#
;
D
3+ '
!
$
/
(
*
%%'#
/ #
'
%
++% (
%%#G
D
3+ '
*!
/!
%%'
#
%*
% ++%!
, +/
$
'* ++ %
= # ?%'
#
'$ &
== #G
5 D %$#
$ #% %**%#
''
# %* %
++%
(
%%#G
E
0 D
# %
% ++% - % */
%
++%!
$
' #
'* ++ %
#
%'*
==
#G
= D
-#
*/
'- - &
'# ' $
, %%*
++ # '%#
%%#G
D
?' * - +#
'$ # %%# "%
&
% '%#
#
% % '%#
#9 &
'% '$
# %%# "%!
'$ ++ # $ %
$# /G
E D
% '%#
+*/
##
#9 & '%#
*/
#
* & ( $ %
%%#
& '
# '
' # <
4
' % '*
#& >F-*
'
' 0
' +**&#
,#
3 ( & / 1 , 2,!
-$# >F-*
'
*
'&
>
0 # *# ?% # '
*/
*/ '' '$
- '%
& % # , %!
/!
>
% % '%# !
&
#
++%
3
/ (
!
-$# >F-*
'
% '%# ( %
& ' 10.
Reference can further be made to Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303, wherein Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that the power of the High Court in quashing a criminal complaint or an FIR, in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction, is distinct and different from the power given to a criminal court for compounding the offences under Section 320 of the Code. Inherent power is of wide plentitude with no statutory limitation but it has to be exercised in accordance with the guidelines engrafted in such power viz; (i) to secure the ends of justice or (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any Court. Reference can further be made to Narinder Singh and Ors. Vs. State of Punjab : (2014) 6 SCC 466, wherein it was by Hon'ble Supreme Court that while exercising power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., the High Court has to examine as to whether the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak and continuation of criminal case would put him into great oppression and prejudice and injustice would be caused to him by not quashing criminal case.
11.
In Dhruvaram Murlidhar Sonar vs. State of Maharashtra : 2019 (18) SCC 191, Hon'ble Supreme Court, while reiterating the parameters as laid down in Bhajan Lal's case (supra), had observed that for quashing of the proceedings, meticulous analysis of factum of taking cognizance of an offence by the Magistrate was not called for. Appreciation of evidence was also not permissible in exercise of inherent powers. If the allegations set out in the complaint did not constitute the offence of which
4
cognizance has been taken, it is open to the High Court to quash the same in exercise of its inherent powers.
12.
In Neeharika Infrastructure vs. State of Maharashtra : 2021 SCC OnLine SC 315, the Apex Court observed that the Courts ought to be cautious in exercising powers under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. They do have power to quash. The test is whether or not the allegations in the FIR disclose the commission of a cognizable offence? The merits of the allegations are not to be entered into nor the power of the investigating agency to investigate into allegations involving the commission of a cognizable offence is to be trenched upon.
5
.&
#$ '
-(#
** # % ++% '
5 3
!
/
*
'*/ %'
% # +
+ #
%*
+ ' %*
++% +
#+ # % 5E 3
' +
'% -#
5E4 3 "
'
% # ++% +
#+ #
5E 3
+**& % %
%". / 6!7 &6!7 2, 3/!3 / 89 2 "/!6!1 !"3!&& &&%!'!" '! . /9 $ :% .!1 .
3 /&!';&$!'& ' 9 # %'!/# / ! < % #%&.!' & ,8) 0
++%
5 3
+
++% +
5E
5
'%
++% +
% + ''/
% #
- *# !
$*!
(
' %
5 3
=
)'
&
-$ %# ' &!
&
H
( '* / %%
' %* '#
/
$ '%
3 '% '* !
'# '# %$#
'* !
+
- ' %
"?' !
$ *#
*$**# &
'
* % %%# %*
(
+ #
%* + ' %* 8
(
%* -*
'# %*
'
%%#!
$
'#
%* -* '#
(
/ !
**
$ -* #
%* -* # '# -%
*+!
** # *
%*!
# %
C &
''/ %'
/9 %%# ' -/
%* & ''/ %'
+ 1
% + '*/ %'
.
$ %
'%
** # *
%*
$/ %#
'* %#
%# & - #9 (
** # *
%* "** %
#-
- $ /
23
** +!
$
'-
%%'# % %%%
** #
( '* >&$!
'#
'* =
#
+
5 /
8
?'* & $
#* /
*# 3
$ '# '#
% (&
- % + I / 3
&**
*# '' #* /
*# *
-** !
&
%
+
%% #* /!
%'
-
#%
?
$
#-
- +*
# ''
*# +*%
%% &
% **/ ''#
& ' ++%
1 *
%
#
'* %# ' -$
F
'
"# $ F
' 3
!
?'* #* /
*#
$
%!
#- -*/ % *# #
*
&%( $ % # % %
'%# & -
**/ #* /#
''
*
+
* */ -
*
'-
* $ #% %**%#
''
# %* % ++%
5 3
E
$ / %
% %!
% ## '
*$**#
!
/
!
&**/
++
!
# (
" %!
' %
'%
%
!
&*#!
+!
*
%*
,
%!
?%
'&
= .
&
%1
'%#
&*# , +%
#
%
+ # ++%
"%%# */!
'
**&# . 4
0 !
#
5
3
*
- !
% 7#
%1
'%#
+!
## #
'
%**
''* !
/!
* '# +
)*)*
"!( ) *
+ *