In economic offences, power u/s 482 CrPC should be used sparingly#indianlaws

The Supreme Court has held in the inherent power of the High Court under Section 482 CrPC should be sparingly used. In economic offences Court must not only keep in view that money has been paid to the bank which has been defrauded but also the society at large. It is not a case of simple assault or a theft of a trivial amount; but such offences are well planned and committed with a deliberate design with an eye of personal profit regardless of consequence to the society at large. To quash the proceeding merely on the ground that the accused has settled the amount with the bank would be a misplaced sympathy.

High Court in the instant matter while exercising its inherent power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) quashed the criminal proceedings under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) read with Section 120-B IPC and all proceedings consequent thereto.

In the present case accused was alleged of committing ‘forgery’ for the purpose of cheating and use of forged documents as genuine in order to embezzle public money. The proceedings were later quashed on the ground that parties (accused and bank) have settled all disputes.

Supreme Court reversed the finding of High Court holding that the inherent power of the High Court under Section 482 CrPC should be sparingly used. Only when the Court comes to the conclusion that there would be manifest injustice or there would be abuse of the process of the Court if such power is not exercised, Court would quash the proceedings.

In economic offences Court must not only keep in view that money has been paid to the bank which has been defrauded but also the society at large. It is not a case of simple assault or a theft of a trivial amount; but the offence (as those in the instant matter) are well planned and committed with a deliberate design with an eye of personal profit regardless of consequence to the society at large. To quash the proceeding merely on the ground that the accused has settled the amount with the bank would be a misplaced sympathy. If the prosecution against the economic offenders is not allowed to continue, the entire community is aggrieved.

A crime of this nature falls in the category of offences which travel far ahead of personal or private wrong, having the potential to usher in economic crisis. The Court is expected to be on guard to these kinds of adroit moves with its principal duty should be to scan the entire facts to find out the thrust of allegations and the crux of the settlement.

Central Bureau of Investigation vs. Maninder Singh

SC, 28.08.2015

Criminal Appeal No. 1496 of 2009