On Tuesday, the Supreme Court of India, in one of its judgement has held that Criminal Proceedings cannot be quashed on the basis of statements recorded before Police officials in terms of Section 161 CrPc.

The judgement came out in a case titled as RAJEEV KOURAV v/s BAISAHAB AND ORS. 

The Court during the hearing laid down that interference by High Court under Section 482 CrPC is only warranted in order to prevent abuse of Court process and to secure a tends of justice.

CASE BACKGROUND

The Appellant herein has filed a complaint in which he alleged that respondents subjected his wife to harassment due to which she committed suicide along with her two children.

The three Respondents' were relatives of the Appellant.

In the investigation, a final report was filed on completion. Following this, a petition under Section 482 CrPC was filed by the Respondent for the quashing of the criminal proceedings before the High Court of Madhya Pradesh.

The Respondents in their submission contended that those ingredients of "Abetment to Suicide" in terms of Section 306 IPC weren't made out as the charge sheet didn't disclose any direct nexus or evidence to suggest incitement of suicide of the deceased.

The High Court in its conclusion held that there was nothing present on record to show that the actions of the Respondents led to the suicide of the Appellant's wife and his children. It was held that at most, a case of criminal intimidation was made out on perusing statements of the Respondents recorded under Section 161 CrPC. The Court thus accordingly quashed the criminal proceedings against the Respondents.

Aggrieved by High Court's judgement the Appellant approached the Supreme Court via a Civil Appeal.

The Court, allowed the criminal appeal and held that quashing of criminal proceedings cannot be meted out by the High Courts if a prima facie case is made out disclosing the ingredients of the alleged offence.

It remarked that the appreciation of evidence in a petition under Section 482 CrPC was a matter of exceptional circumstance.

It was held,

"It is settled law that the evidence produced by the accused in his defence cannot be looked into by the Court, except in very exceptional circumstances, at the initial stage of the criminal proceedings. It is trite law that the High Court cannot embark upon the appreciation of evidence while considering the petition filed under Section 482 CrPC for quashing criminal proceedings"

The Court as well noted that the statements recorded in terms of Section 161 CrPC were wholly inadmissible in evidence and were not a valid ground for allowing a petition under Section 482 CrPC.

"The conclusion of the High Court to quash the criminal proceedings is on the basis of its assessment of the statements recorded under Section 161 CrPC. Statements of witnesses recorded under Section 161 CrPC being wholly inadmissible in evidence cannot be taken into consideration by the Court"

Contention raised by Former Kerala High Court Judge, Justice V Ramkumar

"The above decision appears to be wrong. When the consistent view of the Supreme Court has been that even an FIR can be quashed u/s 482 Cr. P.C, the view now taken that the charge sheet cannot be quashed since the statements recorded u/s 161 Cr. PC.cannot be evaluated in view of the bar Under Section 162 Cr. P.C., is patently wrong. The interdict u/s 162 (1) Cr. P.C operates only during the inquiry or trial in respect of the offence. Consideration by the High Court of a petition u/s 482 Cr. PC is neither an inquiry or trial so as to attract the bar u/s 162 (1) Cr.PC.
It is by evaluating the statements under section 161 Cr. P.C that a criminal court decides to discharge an accused or frame charge against him. That is made possible because at that stage it is not an inquiry or trial in respect of the offence. That is precisely the reason why the I61 statements can be considered by the Court during the inquiry u/s 452 Cr. PC regarding final disposal of property"

The judgement was delivered by Justice L. Nageshwar Rao & Justice Deepak Gupta on 11-02-2020.

Read Judgement Here:

 

Share this Document :

Picture Source :