The Bombay High Court has quashed an FIR in a commercial cheating dispute that the parties had fully settled, but imposed costs of Rs 25,000 on the applicant, holding that criminal law cannot be used as a bargaining chip or a recovery mechanism for private settlements. Setting the criminal machinery in motion, only to seek consent quashing later, wastes public and judicial resources, the Court said, and costs in such ‘consent quashing’ matters serve as a deterrent.
The Supreme Court has set aside a Karnataka High Court order that had quashed an FIR, holding that a Magistrate’s direction to register an FIR under Section 156(3) of the CrPC does not amount to ‘taking cognizance’ of an offence. It also clarified that the mandatory affidavit safeguard laid down in Priyanka Srivastava is to be applied by substance and not as an empty formality. The investigation was directed to be reopened.
The Delhi High Court has refused to quash a POCSO and rape case on the basis of a compromise stated to have been reached with the victim’s family, holding that a child victim or their family cannot compromise an offence under the POCSO Act. Relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in Gian Singh, Justice Sachin Datta held that heinous and serious sexual offences are not private in nature and cannot be quashed on settlement.
The Karnataka High Court has quashed an FIR against a shopkeeper accused of making insulting remarks against the Prime Minister when questioned about barricades outside his shop, holding that the offence of intentional insult to provoke breach of peace under Section 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita requires an insult directed at the complainant, not a third party. With no such ingredient made out, and an unexplained delay in the complaint, continuing the prosecution would be an abuse of process.
The Delhi High Court has set aside both the grant of bail to a man accused of bank fraud, premised on a monetary settlement with the bank, and its later cancellation for breach of that settlement, holding that the liberty of an accused cannot be made to depend on the performance of a monetary settlement with the complainant. A criminal court, Justice Sanjeev Narula reiterated, is not a recovery agent. The bail application was remitted for fresh consideration on merits.
The Gujarat High Court has quashed an FIR under the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 against a man arraigned as a customer in a brothel raid, holding that the offences under Sections 3, 5, 7 and 9 of the Act are directed at brothel-keepers, procurers and those in a position of authority who abet prostitution, and cannot be invoked against a customer. The Court also held that no cognizance of the Section 188 IPC offence could be taken absent a complaint under Section 195 CrPC.
After the applicant was granted pardon and became an approver, the State argued that a regular bail application was no longer maintainable. The Delhi High Court treated the plea as one under its inherent jurisdiction and held that the statutory bar on releasing an approver under Section 343(4)(b) of the BNSS operates only against the Trial Court.
The Supreme Court held that a company can be prosecuted for offences requiring mens rea even without arraigning any director or employee, laying down a framework for attributing criminal intent to corporations. New Delhi: In a significant ruling on corporate criminal liability, the Supreme Court has held that a company can be prosecuted for an […]
The Allahabad High Court quashed money laundering proceedings against Tulsiani Construction and its directors, holding that civil and commercial disputes cannot be converted into criminal prosecutions under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act. The Court also set aside the ED’s summoning and attachment actions.
