High Court’s Failure to Quash Malicious Criminal Proceedings: A Landmark Judgment

The case revolves around a long-standing property dispute between Ahmad Ali Quraishi and Sajjad Quraishi, which later escalated into criminal allegations. The appellants and respondents belong to the same family and are neighbors. The legal battle began when Anwarul Haq, the father of the accused, filed a civil suit for partition of properties. The dispute led to multiple altercations, culminating in the complainant accusing Ahmad Ali and Liyakat Ali of inappropriate behavior and assault against his daughters.

On July 19, 2016, a quarrel took place, prompting police intervention. Proceedings were initiated under Sections 151, 107, and 116 CrPC to maintain peace. However, on August 29, 2016, Sajjad Quraishi filed an application under Section 156(3) CrPC, alleging that his daughters were subjected to indecent gestures and physical assault by the accused. The application also claimed that the accused and their family members later forcibly entered the complainant’s house and continued the assault.

The case went through multiple judicial reviews. The Sessions Court rejected the complainant’s plea, noting that no sufficient grounds existed for registering a case. Further investigations, including an inquiry by the Superintendent of Police under National Human Rights Commission instructions, found no substantial evidence supporting the allegations.

High Court’s Role and Supreme Court’s Verdict

The complainant persisted by filing a fresh complaint in 2017. Despite previous judicial decisions and lack of evidence, the Sessions Court proceeded to summon the accused. The High Court, in its ruling on February 21, 2018, refused to quash the criminal proceedings, leading to the appellants’ appeal to the Supreme Court.

Key Observations by the Supreme Court

• Highlighting the property dispute as the root cause, the Court noted that the criminal complaint appeared to be an abuse of legal provisions.
• The Supreme Court reaffirmed its stance from State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, outlining categories where courts can quash proceedings under Section 482 CrPC.
• It stated, “When a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused, the court must intervene.”
• The lack of new evidence in the fresh complaint and inconsistencies in the complainant’s allegations were highlighted.
• Given the findings from police investigations and prior judicial rejections, the Court ruled that the continuation of the proceedings was unwarranted.

Final Judgment

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal and quashed the criminal proceedings initiated by Complaint Case No.1 of 2017, stating:

“Permitting such criminal proceedings to go on is nothing but an abuse of the process of the Court which needs to be interfered with by this Court.”

This ruling serves as a significant precedent in addressing misuse of criminal law in personal disputes, reinforcing the importance of preventing harassment through legal mechanisms.

Petitioner Name: Ahmad Ali Quraishi and Anr..
Respondent Name: The State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr..
Judgment By: Justice Ashok Bhushan, Justice M.R. Shah.
Place Of Incident: Jaunpur, Uttar Pradesh.
Judgment Date: 30-01-2020.

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

Download Judgment: Ahmad Ali Quraishi a vs The State of Uttar P Supreme Court of India Judgment Dated 30-01-2020.pdf