The Jharkhand High Court has taken a stance that the inherent power of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and under Section 482 of Cr.P.C can be exercised in a case where abuse of process of law is made out and where it appears to the Court that the offence in question, although covered under the SC/ST Act, is primarily civil or private where the alleged offence has not been committed on account of the caste of the victim, or where the continuation of the legal proceedings would be an abuse of the process of law, the Court can exercise its powers to quash the proceedings
Brief Facts:
The respondent has initiated criminal proceedings against the petitioners under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. One of the petitioners filed a writ petition to quash the proceedings and interim protection was provided to the petitioner. However, the respondent has challenged the maintainability of the said writ petitions on the grounds that since the provision of appeal under Section 14A of the said act is there.
Contentions of the Petitioner:
The counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the inherent power of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and under Section 482 of Cr.P.C in a case where abuse of process of law is made out, is not exercised, aggrieved person will be put to a great prejudice. He further submitted that the Court is only required to consider whether the case of abuse of process of law is made out or not and if the Court comes to a conclusion that the abuse of process of law is there, the Court can exercise its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India or Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. The counsel for the petitioner has relied of the judgement of the Supreme Court in Ramawatar v. State of Madhya Pradesh, wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court has categorically held that if the offence is covered under a special statute, it would not refrain the Hon’ble Supreme Court or the High Court from exercising their respective powers under Article 142 or under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. He also relied on the judgement of the Supreme Court in the case of Hitesh Verma v. State of Uttarakhand and another and contended that if a private dispute is there and for that unnecessarily the provision of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 is invoked, the Court can exercise its power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India or Section 482 of Cr.P.C.
Contentions of the Respondent:
The learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the High Court does not act as a Court of appeal against the decision of a Court or Tribunal to correct the errors of fact and does not by assuming jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and exercise power when alternative remedy provided by the statute is there. He further submitted that the learned Court has already taken cognizance and that order can be challenged under Section 14A of the act. The counsel for the respondent has contended that the High Court is required to restrain itself when alternate remedy under the statute is there. He submitted that once the statute is there, procedure required has to be followed. He has relied upon a judgement of the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court reported in MANU/UP/3484/2018 and contended that as the respondent has an alternate remedy by way of filing appeal under the said Statute, the writ petitions are not maintainable.
Observations of the Court:
The Hon'ble Court relying upon the judgement in the case of Andi Mukta Sadguru Shree Muktajee Vandas Swami Suvarna Jayanti Mahotsav Smarak Trust and others v. V. R. Rudani and others observed that if a person is doing the work of public element and not the State within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India and the Court comes to a conclusion that public element is involved therein, even in such cases, the High Court is empowered to exercise its power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. On the question that whether the High Court can exercise its power under Article 226 if the case of abuse of law is there, the Hon’ble Court relied on the judgement in the case of Ramawatar, where the Supreme Court held that “where it appears to the Court that the offence in question, although covered under the SC/ST Act, is primarily civil or private where the alleged offence has not been committed on account of the caste of the victim, or where the continuation of the legal proceedings would be an abuse of the process of law, the Court can exercise its powers to quash the proceedings.”
Further, it was observed that the Court is required to consider even if the allegations are taken to be true on their face value and if it does not constitute any offence under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 against the aggrieved person, the Court can exercise its power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and in such a situation, if the High Court has not exercised its power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, it will amount to abandon the said provision.
The Hon’ble Court further observed by relying upon the judgment of the Supreme Court of India in the case of State of Haryana and others v. Bhajan Lal and others and Haji Iqbal @ Bala through S.P.O.A v. State of U.P and others, that if the abuse of process of law is there, the High Court can exercise its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India or Section 482 or Cr.P.C. The Court also observed that Alternative remedy is not always bar if a case is entertained even in civil cases without jurisdiction and the writ petition can be maintained under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, as has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Whirlpool Corpn. v. Registrar of Trade Marks. Thus in appropriate cases, Article 226 of the Constitution of India can be entertained by the High Court, however, the power must be exercised with care and circumspection and that has been held in plethora of judgments by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as well as the High Courts. If the FIR is registered malafidely under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, the same can be considered in light of paragraph 102 of the judgment passed Bhajan Lal under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and if the case is coming within the said parameters, the High Court can exercise its power.
The decision of the Court:
In the interest of justice, the court granted the respondent's request for more time and scheduled the case for a later date and directed that interim order passed in the respective cases shall remain in force, till the next date.
Case Title: Abdul Halim vs The State of Jharkhand and Others.
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
Case No.: W.P. (Cr.) No. 371 of 2023
Advocate for the Applicant: Mr. Pandey Neeraj Rai, Mr. Akchansh Kishore, Mr. Saurabh Sagar, Mr. Sumeet Gadodia, Mrs. Aanya, Mr. Nilohit Choubey.
Advocate for the Respondent: Mr. Kaushik Sarkhel.
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :
