Attempt to Murder Case: Supreme Court Upholds High Court’s Refusal to Quash Criminal Proceedings

The Supreme Court of India, in its judgment dated July 31, 2019, ruled in the case of Chilakamarthi Venkateswarlu & Anr. v. State of Andhra Pradesh, affirming the High Court’s refusal to quash criminal proceedings against the appellants under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC). The case involved serious allegations of attempt to murder under Section 307 IPC and other criminal offenses. The Supreme Court held that quashing an FIR should be an exceptional remedy and that the allegations warranted a full trial.

Background of the Case

The appellants and the de facto complainant were close relatives entangled in a long-standing property dispute. The key details of the case are as follows:

• The de facto complainant filed a criminal complaint alleging that the appellants attacked him with iron rods and attempted to kill him.
• The appellants were charged under Sections 307 (attempt to murder), 323 (causing hurt), 427 (mischief causing damage), 447 (criminal trespass), and 506(2) (criminal intimidation) read with Section 34 (common intention) of the IPC.
• The appellants filed a petition under Section 482 of the CrPC in the Andhra Pradesh High Court, seeking to quash the criminal proceedings.
• The High Court dismissed the petition, stating that there was sufficient material to warrant a trial.

Legal Issues Considered

The core issues before the Supreme Court were:

• Whether the High Court was correct in refusing to quash the criminal proceedings.
• Whether the allegations in the FIR and witness statements disclosed a prima facie case for trial.
• Whether the proceedings amounted to an abuse of the legal process, as claimed by the appellants.

Arguments Presented

Arguments by the Petitioners (Accused):

• The criminal case was a counterblast to a civil partition suit (OS No. 92 of 2012) and a previous criminal complaint (Criminal Complaint No. 518 of 2012) filed by them.
• The allegations in the FIR were fabricated and filed three years after the alleged incident.
• The first appellant, who was employed as a lecturer in Hyderabad, was not even present at the time of the incident.
• The High Court failed to consider that the case was purely a civil dispute and should not have been criminalized.

Arguments by the Respondents (State of Andhra Pradesh and the Complainant):

• The injuries suffered by the complainant, as described in the FIR, were consistent with the alleged attack.
• The attempt to cause injuries to the head, a vital organ, justified the application of Section 307 IPC (attempt to murder).
• The High Court was correct in holding that the allegations were serious enough to warrant a trial.
• The delay in filing the complaint was due to fear and intimidation caused by the accused.

Supreme Court’s Observations

The Supreme Court carefully reviewed the case and upheld the High Court’s ruling, making the following key observations:

• Quashing of FIRs is an extraordinary remedy: The Court reiterated that Section 482 CrPC should be used sparingly to prevent miscarriage of justice.
• Prima facie case established: The allegations in the complaint, supported by witness statements, disclosed the ingredients of the offenses charged.
• Criminal proceedings should not be stopped prematurely: Whether the allegations were true or fabricated was a matter for trial.
• Section 307 IPC applies even if injuries are not fatal: The intention to cause grievous hurt, particularly to a vital organ like the head, is sufficient.

The Supreme Court stated:

“The power under Section 482 of CrPC should not be exercised to stifle legitimate prosecution. If the allegations in the complaint disclose an offense, the proceedings should not be quashed prematurely.”

Key Precedents Cited

The Court referred to several landmark judgments to reinforce its decision:

• State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal (1992 Supp (1) SCC 335) – Laid down guidelines for quashing FIRs under Section 482 CrPC.
• Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. v. Mohd. Sharful Haque (2005) 1 SCC 122 – Stressed that inherent powers should not be exercised to interfere with legitimate prosecution.
• State of Karnataka v. L. Muniswamy (1977) 2 SCC 699 – Held that quashing of a criminal case is permissible only in cases of manifest injustice.
• Dhanalakshmi v. R. Prasanna Kumar (1990 Supp SCC 686) – Stated that an FIR should not be quashed unless it is frivolous, vexatious, or entirely without basis.

Final Verdict

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and ruled that:

• The criminal proceedings in PRC No. 2 of 2018 would continue.
• The appellants were free to present their defense at trial.
• The petition under Section 482 CrPC was rightly dismissed by the High Court.

Conclusion

This judgment reinforces the principle that courts should not interfere in criminal proceedings unless there is clear abuse of process. The ruling ensures that serious allegations, such as attempt to murder, are examined through proper judicial trial rather than being dismissed at a preliminary stage.

Petitioner Name: Chilakamarthi Venkateswarlu.
Respondent Name: State of Andhra Pradesh & Anr..
Judgment By: Justice Indira Banerjee, Justice Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud.
Place Of Incident: Andhra Pradesh.
Judgment Date: 31-07-2019.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: Chilakamarthi Venkat vs State of Andhra Prad Supreme Court of India Judgment Dated 31-07-2019.pdf

Direct Downlaod Judgment: Direct downlaod this Judgment

See all petitions in Attempt to Murder Cases
See all petitions in Bail and Anticipatory Bail
See all petitions in Criminal Defamation
See all petitions in Fraud and Forgery
See all petitions in Theft and Robbery Cases
See all petitions in Judgment by Indira Banerjee
See all petitions in Judgment by Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud
See all petitions in dismissed
See all petitions in Quashed
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments July 2019
See all petitions in 2019 judgments

See all posts in Criminal Cases Category
See all allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all Dismissed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all partially allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category