HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE G. ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.8867 OF 2023
O R D E R:
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.') by the petitioner - accused No.3 to quash the proceedings against her in C.C.No.970 of 2023 pending on the file of XIV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Hyderabad. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 406, 420 and 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri S.Ganesh, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1 - State and perused the record.
3. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is innocent of the offences and she has no direct or indirect involvement with the crime registered against her. In order to support his contention, learned counsel relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Sunil Bharti Mittal v.
GAC,J Crl.P.No.8867_2023 2 Central Bureau of Investigation 1, wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court held that "the IPC does not contain any provision for attaching vicarious liability on part of the managing director or the directors of the company when the accused is the company. Thus, an individual who has perpetrated the commission of an offence on behalf of a company could be made accused, along with company, only if there was sufficient evidence of his active role coupled with criminal intent". Learned counsel further contended that there is no specific allegation or role played by the petitioner in commission of offence. Learned counsel also filed medical record of the petitioner which clearly discloses that she is ripe for delivery, which is expected to be on 23.10.2023. Therefore, he prayed to quash the proceedings against the petitioner.
4. On the other hand, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor contended that after due investigation, the police have filed charge sheet against the petitioner. He further contended that it is not a fit case to quash the proceedings against the petitioner 1 AIR 2015 SC 923 GAC,J Crl.P.No.8867_2023 3 at this juncture and the matter has to be decided only after conducting trial by the Court below.
5. On a perusal of the charge sheet, this Court is of the view that truth or otherwise of the allegations made against the petitioner can be decided only after conducting trial. Hence, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the proceedings against the petitioner.
6. Taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner is arrayed as accused No.3 no specific overt act was made against her as far as the transactions between the three companies; and the date of her expected delivery is on 23.10.2023, this Court is of the considered opinion that the appearance/attendance of the petitioner - accused No.3 before the trial Court shall be dispensed with.
7. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is disposed of. The appearance/attendance of the petitioner - accused No.3 before the Court of XIV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Hyderabad in C.C.No.970 of 2023 is dispensed with, unless her presence is required by the trial Court for a specific purpose or at GAC,J Crl.P.No.8867_2023 4 the time of recording examination under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and on the date of pronouncement of judgment. Further, the petitioner is at liberty to move an application before the trial Court seeking to discharge her from the case. On such application being filed and if prima facie case is not made out against her, the trial Court shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders within a period of three (03) weeks from the date of filing of the said discharge petition without being influenced by any of the observations made by this Court in this order.
Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.
_______________________________ G.ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY, J Date: 13.09.2023 ns Note:
C.C. by 15.09.2023 b/o.
ns