Sanchayita Lahkar

The High Court of Calcutta, Single Bench of Justice Chaitali Chatterjee Das has quashed the criminal proceedings against a senior retired official of the West Bengal Financial Corporation and directed that the case pending before the magistrate be set aside. The dispute arose from an FIR and charge-sheet alleging that the official, along with other WBFC personnel, forcibly entered the residence of a borrower’s spouse, abused and threatened her in connection with alleged loan fraud, pushed her, and thereby committed offences including trespass, criminal intimidation and outraging modesty. The Court found the criminal process was initiated with an ulterior motive to obstruct WBFC’s loan recovery action and held that allowing the prosecution to continue would amount to a gross abuse of the process of law.

The petitioner sought quashing of Charge-Sheet No. 182 of 2020 dated September 30, 2020 under Sections 448, 354, 509 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. The complaint alleged that on November 8, 2016, the petitioner along with three officials of the West Bengal Financial Corporation forcibly entered the residence of the de-facto complainant, abused and threatened her, pushed her, and spoke aggressively, causing her minor daughter to fall ill. The FIR was lodged on November 11, 2016.

Also Read: Welfare Of Child Paramount But Not Sole Consideration In Custody Disputes; Courts Must Also Weigh Conduct, Finances And Children’s Comfort: Supreme Court

The petitioner contended that he was a retired senior official of WBFC and had visited the residence in connection with loan recovery proceedings initiated against the husband of the complainant. It was submitted that the FIR was lodged to stall recovery of public dues. The General Manager (O&M), WBFC, addressed a letter dated November 9, 2020 stating that the visit was in discharge of official duty for recovery of defaulted loan dues from a borrower company. The Investigating Officer submitted the charge-sheet on September 30, 2020. The petitioner alleged unexplained delay of nearly four years in investigation, failure to record statements of relevant officials, and absence of ingredients of the alleged offences.

The Court recorded that “The scope of exercising power under Section 482 has to be used in rarest of rare only when the complaint itself would not constitute an offence primarily and also, and if it is found that to continue, the proceeding would be gross abuse of the process of law.” It further recorded that “None of the above can be observed in view of the allegations levelled against the present petitioner.”

On examining the case diary, the Court observed that “The case diary is absolutely silent about the progress of investigation on and from November 12, 2016, till September 26, 2019.” The Court noted that nowhere in the charge-sheet was any explanation found as to why four years were taken to complete the investigation.

Referring to the decision in Mohammad Wajid versus State of U.P., the Court recorded that “whenever an accused comes before the Court invoking either the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure or extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution to get the FIR or the criminal proceeding quashed essentially on the ground that such proceedings are manifestly, frivolous, or vexatious or instituted with the ulterior motive for wrecking vengeance, then, in such circumstances, the court owes the duty to look into the FIR with care and a little more closely.” It further recorded that “it will not be just enough for the court to look into the averments made in the complaint alone for the purpose of ascertaining, whether the necessary ingredients to constitute the alleged offence are disclosed or not.”

While referring to State of Karnataka versus L. Muniswamy, the Court quoted that “in the exercise of these wholesome power, the High Court is entitled to quash a proceeding if it comes to the conclusion that allowing the proceeding to continue, would be an abuse of the process of the court, or that the aims of justice required that the proceeding ought to be quashed.” It further quoted that “a court proceeding or not to be permitted to degenerate into a weapon of harassment or persecution.”

The Court also recorded that “On careful analysis of the entire facts and circumstances this Court is of the view that allowing the proceedings to continue further would not only be an empty formality but also would be gross abuse of the process of law.”

Also Read: Calcutta High Court Dismisses Eastern Railway’s Appeal, Upholds ₹3.56 Lakh Compensation To Family Of Railway Contractor's Worker Killed After Being Hit By Train At Worksite

The Court directed that “Hence this revisional application stands allowed. The proceeding pending before the learned Court of 5th Judicial Magistrate at Howrah be quashed.” “No order as to costs.”

Advocates Representing the Parties:

For the Petitioners:  Mr. Manjit Singh, Adv.; Mr. Biswajit Mal, Adv.; Mr. Arkaprabho Roy, Adv.

For the Respondents: Mr. Madhusudan Sur, Ld. APP; Mr. Md. Anwar Hossain, Adv.; Mr. Dipankar Pramanick, Adv.; Mr. Tapas Mukhopadhyay, Adv.

Case Title: Prabir Mukhopadhyay @ Prabir Mukherjee vs The State of West Bengal & Anr.
Case Number: CRR 3775 of 2022
Bench: Justice Chaitali Chatterjee Das
Keywords: Prabir Mukhopadhyay @ Prabir Mukherjee vs The State of West Bengal & Anr.,