Criminal Prosecution for Civil Disputes of property transactions – Caution of the Supreme Court of India
In the second case, the Police refused FIR but the Court allowed the complaint and directed the Police to register the complaint for offences under Sections 420 and 120B of the IPC alleging that the accused persons routinely take money on the pretext of bainama (earnest money) of property and subsequently refuse to enter into agreement.
By the Order dated 19.9.2019, the High Court partly allowed the anticipatory bail application and directed the police not to arrest the appellant till charge-sheet.
On 18.10.2019, the charge-sheet was filed. By the order dated 10.05.2021, the Allahabad High Court granted interim anticipatory bail but dismissed the application on 23.3.2022 on the ground that non-bailable warrants were issued and the charge-sheet was filed.
The Supreme Court granted the anticipatory bail and observed that the Police rightly did not register FIR but the Magistrate directed for FIR. There is need for Magistrate to be cautious in examining whether the facts of the case disclose a civil or a criminal wrong. Attempts at initiating vexatious criminal proceedings should be thwarted early on, as a summoning order, or even a direction to register an FIR, has grave consequences for setting the criminal proceedings in motion. Any effort to settle civil disputes and claims which do not involve any criminal offence by way of applying pressure through criminal prosecution should be deprecated and discouraged.
Judgment dated 1.5.2024 in Criminal Appeal No. ….of 2024 (arising out of Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No.1074 of 2017) of Arif Ahmed and Another Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Another with connected matters.
