Rajasthan High Court
Atma Ram Gupta S/O Shri Ladu Ram Ji vs State Of Rajasthan on 16 November, 2021
Bench: Farjand Ali
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 4301/2021
Atma Ram Gupta S/o Shri Ladu Ram Ji
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. S.S. Hora with
Mr. Tara Chand Sharma
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Arvind Kumar, PP
Mr. R.P. Garg with
Ms. Swati Arora
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
16/11/2021
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the
complainant as well as learned Public Prosecutor.
In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the case
diary would be required.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it's purely a
case of civil nature but an attempt has been made to give it a
colour of criminal prosecution. The contractual obligation has been
done as the petitioner has performed his part as assigned to him
by way of an agreement/contract entered in between the parties,
therefore till pendency of the petition, interim protection may be
granted in his favour.
Learned counsels for the complainant has vehemently
opposed the prayer. It is asserted by them that the work has not
been done by the petitioner. Learned counsel for the complainant
placed reliance on the judgment passed by the Supreme Court in
(2 of 3) [CRLMP-4301/2021]
the case of M/S Neeharika, Infrastructure vs The State Of
Maharashtra on 13 April, 2021 (CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 330
OF 2021) & the State Of Telangana vs Habib Abdullah
Jeelani & Ors, (CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1144 OF 2016).
In the case of M/S Neeharika, Infrastructure, (supra), in pare
15 the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed that there may be
some cases where the initiation of criminal proceedings may be an
abuse of process of law. In such cases, and only in exception
cases and where it is found that non interference wold result into
miscarriage of justice, the High Court, in exercise of its inherent
powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and/or Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, may quash the FIR/complaint/criminal
proceedings and even may stay the further investigation.
In the said judgment, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has also
propounded that the High Court should be slow in interfering the
criminal proceedings at the initial stage, i.e., quashing petition
filed immediately after lodging the FIR/complaint and no sufficient
time is given to the police to investigate into the allegations of the
FIR/complaint, which is the statutory right/duty of the police
under the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It is
observed that in exceptional cases, when the High Court deems it
fit, regard being had to the parameters of quashing and the self-
restrained imposed by law, may pass appropriate interim orders,
as thought apposite in law, however, the High Court has to give
brief reasons which will reflect the application of mind by the
Court to the relevant facts.
In this view of the legal position, I have gone through the
entire FIR, the relevant portion of the agreement/contract
executed in between the parties. The colour photographs showing
(3 of 3) [CRLMP-4301/2021]
the almost completed construction work claimed to be done by the
petitioner.
An important aspect of this case is that the FIR of this case
came to be lodged on 01.07.2020 but subsequent to lodging of
the FIR; a supplementary developments agreement got executed
in the month of September, 2020 and the same got registered
before the Sub-Registrar, Jaipur on 14.09.2020.
The submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner
that there is nothing in the FIR to show that right from the
inception, the petitioner had a criminal intent to cheat the
complainant, he further submits that there is a distinction between
the term breach of trust and breach of contract and the present
one is not a case of breach of trust.
Pondered over the submissions made by learned counsel for
the parties. After going through entire material, this Court does
not deem it appropriate to stay the investigation, however, it
would be in the interest of justice to grant an ad-interim
protection against arrest in favour of the petitioner.
Accordingly, learned Public Prosecutor is directed to call for
the case diary and the factual report.
In the meantime, the petitioner shall not be arrested.
However, he would be required to join the investigation.
Put up on 16.12.2021.
( FARJAND ALI),J
TN/35
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
