JUDGMENT : MADAN GOPAL VYAS, J. 1- ;kphx.k dh vksj ls /kkjk 482 naM ÁfØ;k lafgrk ds rgr ;g f}rh; fofo/k nkafMd ;kfpdk iqfyl Fkkuk tokgj uxj] ftyk Jhxaxkuxj esa ntZ ÁFke lwpuk fjiksVZ la[;k 631@2019 dks fujLr djus gsrq ÁLrqr dh xbZ gSA 2- eSaus i{kdkjku ds ;ksX; vf/koDrkx.k o ;ksX; yksd vfHk;kstd dh cgl lquh o vfHkys[k dk voyksdu fd;kA 3- ;ksX; vf/koDrk ;kphx.k us ;g rdZ fn;k fd ÁFke lwpuk fjiksVZ ds vuqlkj ?kVuk fnukad 25-09-2019 ls 15-10-2019 ds e/; dh gSA ifjoknh dk ifjokn fnukad 22-12-2019 dks ÁkIr gqvk] ftlds vk/kkj ij mlh fnu ÁFke lwpuk fjiksVZ iathc) dh xbZ] ysfdu mlls iwoZ gh i{kdkjksa ds e/; ;kfpdk ds iSjk la[;k 03 esa of.kZr ek/;LFke~ ,oa lqyg vf/kfu;e] 1996 o nhokuh nkoksa ds djhc 17 Ádj.k ÁkjaHk gks x, FksA i=koyh ds i`”B la[;k 58 ij INSTRUCTIONS/CHECK LIST FOR FILLING KYC FORM (For Trading and Demat Account) ds Important Points vafdr gSa vkSj i`”B la[;k 59 ij Dispute Resolution ds vuqlkj fdlh Ádkj dk fookn mRiUu gksus ij Ádj.k e/;LFk ds le{k ÁLrqr djus dk Áko/kku gSA i{kdkjksa ds e/; fookn mRiUu gksus ij ek/;LFke~ ,oa lqyg vf/kfu;e] 1996 ds rgr e/;LFkrk dh dk;Zokgh gqbZ vkSj e/;LFk ds vokWMZ dks okf.kfT;d U;k;ky;] chdkusj esa pqukSrh nh gqbZ gSA ifjoknh i{k us flfoy U;k;k/kh'k] Jhxaxkuxj ds U;k;ky; esa Hkh migkj&i= dks fujLr djus gsrq nhokuh nkok ÁLrqr fd;k gSA e/;LFk dh dk;Zokgh gLrxr ÁFke lwpuk fjiksVZ iathc) gksus ls iwoZ gh ÁkjaHk gks xbZ FkhA ÁFke lwpuk fjiksVZ esa Hkh laifÙk;ka varfjr djus dk mYys[k gS] ysfdu fdlh O;fDr }kjk viuh laifRr dks varfjr djuk dksbZ vijk/k ugha gksrk gSA ifjoknh ds lkFk lu~ 2012 ls ;kphx.k dk okf.kfT;d laO;ogkj gSA i{kdkjksa ds e/; nhokuh Ád`fr dk fookn gSA ifjoknh dks tks Hkh gkfu gqbZ gS] mlds fy, vkijkf/kd Ádj.k iathc) ugha gks ldrk gSA nhokuh fookn ds fy, nhokuh dkuwu ds rgr ifjoknh dks mipkj miyC/k gS vkSj ifjoknh us /kkjk 9 ek/;LFke~ ,oa lqyg vf/kfu;e] 1996 ds rgr ÁkFkZuk i= ,oa nhokuh nkos Hkh ÁLrqr fd, gq, gSa] ,slh fLFkfr esa ÁFke lwpuk fjiksVZ ntZ djokuk dkuwu dk nq#i;ksx gSA ;ksX; vf/koDrk ;kphx.k us ;g Hkh rdZ fn;k fd Lower Circuit ls ;kphx.k dks djhc 11 djksM+ #i;s dk uqdlku gqvk gSA ;kphx.k dks ifjoknh ds dkj.k uqdlku gqvk gSA i{kdkjksa ds e/; djhc 54 Ádj.k fofHkUu Ád`fr ds] fofHkUu U;k;ky;ksa esa yafcr gSA vUos”k.k] ,lvksth dks lqiqnZ fd;k gqvk gSA ,lvksth us vfu;ferrk,a cjrh gSa] blfy, gLrxr f}rh; nkafMd fofo/k ;kfpdk iks”k.kh; gSA NCDEX dk Lower Circuit yxuk ;kphx.k ds fu;a=.k esa ugha gSA /kkjk 415 Hkkjrh; naM lafgrk esa of.kZr Ny ds dksbZ rRo fo|eku ugha gS vkSj u gh ,sls fdlh rRo dk mYys[k ÁFke lwpuk fjiksVZ esa gS] blfy, dksbZ vijk/k ugha curk gSA NCDEX us ifjoknh ds #i;s dkVs] ftlds fy, ;kphx.k mRrjnk;h ugha gSA var esa fuosnu fd;k fd ;kphx.k dh ;kfpdk Lohdkj dj ÁFke lwpuk fjiksVZ la[;k 631@2019] iqfyl Fkkuk tokgj uxj] Jhxaxkuxj dks vikLr fd;k tkosA mUgksaus vius bu rdksZ dh iqf”V esa fuEufyf[kr uthjsa is'k dh] ftudk eSaus voyksdu fd;k%& 1. Kritika Nagpal vs. Geojit Financial Services Ltd. Arbitration Petition No. 47 of 2009, Bombay High Court, Pronounced on 14th July, 2016 2. Bonanza Commodities Brokers Pvt. Ltd. vs. Mrs. Roshanara Bhinder, Arbitration Petition No. 195 of 2015, Bombay High Court, Pronounced on 16th April, 2015 3. Wyeth Limited and Others vs. State of Bihar and Another, 2022 Live Law (SC) 721 4. Sarabjit Kaur vs. State of Punjab and Another, 2023 Live Law (SC) 157 5. Prof. R.K. Vijayasarathy and Another vs. Sudha Seetharam and Another, (2019) 16 SCC 739 6. Paramjeet Batra vs. State of Uttarakhand and Others, (2013) 11 SCC 673 7. Harshendra Kumar vs. Rebatilata Koley and Others, (2011) 3 SCC 351 8. Vinod Kumar, IAS vs. Union of India and Others, Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 255/2021, Supreme Court of India, Order dated 29-06-2021 9. Paramjeet Batra vs. State of Uttarakhand and Others, (2013) 11 SCC 673 7. Harshendra Kumar vs. Rebatilata Koley and Others, (2011) 3 SCC 351 8. Vinod Kumar, IAS vs. Union of India and Others, Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 255/2021, Supreme Court of India, Order dated 29-06-2021 9. Superintendent and Remembrancer of Legal Affairs, West Bengal vs. Mohan Singh and Others, (1975) 3 SCC 706 4- ;ksX; vf/koDrk ÁR;FkhZ la[;k 02 us ;g rdZ fn;k fd ifjoknh NCDEX dk czksdj gS vkSj ;kphx.k ifjoknh ds xzkgd gSaA lu~ 2012 esa ;kph Ánhi dqekj us ÁFke ckj [kkrk [kqyok;k FkkA rRi'pkr~ lu~ 2019 rd Áse dqekj] js[kk jkuh] deyk nsoh o usgk us [kkrs [kqyok,A lu~ 2016 ls 2018 rd 150 djksM+ #i;ksa dk O;kikj fd;kA djhc 50 djksM+ #i;ksa dk uqdlku gqvk ftuesa ls 11 djksM+ #i;s ;kphx.k ds tek Fks ,oa djhc 39 djksM+ #i;s ckdh FksA iadt dqekj us ekpZ 2019 esa [kkrs dks can dj fn;kA usgk us ebZ] 2019 esa Zero Property esa [kkrk [kqyok;kA fnukad 30-09-2019 ls 03-12-2019 ds e/; ;kphx.k us djhc 15 laifRr;ka vius fudV ds fj'rsnkjksa dks varfjr dhA ;s lHkh laifRr;ka e/;LFk dh dk;Zokgh dks Áfrdwy :i ls ÁHkkfor djus vkSj nhokuh U;k;ky; ls tks Hkh vkns'k gksus gSa] muds rgr ifjoknh jkf'k dh olwyh ds vf/kdkj dks ÁHkkfor djus ds fy, varfjr dh gS] blfy, ;kphx.k dk ;g d`R; Ny dh ifjf/k esa vkrk gSA ;ksX; vf/koDrk ÁR;FkhZ la[;k 02 us ;g Hkh rdZ fn;k fd ;kphx.k dks I.B.T. (Internet Based Trading) dh lqfo/kk ÁkIr Fkh] ftlds vuqlkj ;kphx.k Lo;a Online Trading dj ldrs Fks] ftlesa Broker dk dksbZ laca/k ugha jgrk gSA iwoZ ds Hkh leLr laO;ogkj ;kphx.k us I.B.T. ds ek/;e ls gh fd, gSaA Lower Circuit ls ;kphx.k dks tks uqdlku gqvk] mlds nkf;Ro ls cpus ds fy, 15 laifRr;ka varfjr dh gSA ;ksX; vf/koDrk ÁR;FkhZ la[;k 02 us ;g Hkh rdZ fn;k fd gLrxr ;kfpdk ls iwoZ Hkh ;kphx.k us /kkjk 482 naM ÁfØ;k lafgrk ds v/khu ;kfpdk ÁLrqr dh] tks fu.khZr gks pqdh gS] blfy, /kkjk 482 naM ÁfØ;k lafgrk ds rgr ÁLrqr ;g f}rh; nkafMd fofo/k ;kfpdk iks”k.kh; ugha gSA Ádj.k esa ikap djksM+ ls vf/kd dh jkf'k varxzZLr gS] blfy, Ádj.k Special Operation Group dks vUos”k.k ds fy, Hkstk x;k gSA dsoy Ádj.k Special Operation Group dks vUos”k.k ds fy, Hkstus ds vk/kkj ij ifjfLFkfr;ksa esa dksbZ ifjorZu ugha gksrk gSA vUos”k.k ls ;kphx.k ds fo#) /kkjk 420] 406 o 120ch Hkkjrh; naM lafgrk ds vkjksi Áekf.kr ik, gSaA vr% ,slh ifjfLFkfr;ksa esa ekStwnk ;kfpdk [kkfjt fd, tkus dk fuosnu fd;kA mUgksaus vius bu rdksZ dh iqf”V esa fuEufyf[kr uthjsa is'k dha] ftudk eSaus voyksdu fd;k%& 1. Dr. Lakshman vs. State of Karnataka and Others, AIR 2019 SC 5268 2. M/s. Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra and Others, 2021 Cri. L.J. 2419 3. Vijayander Kumar vs. State of Rajasthan and Another, 2014 AIR SCW 1197 4. Dr. Lakshman vs. State of Karnataka and Others, AIR 2019 SC 5268 2. M/s. Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra and Others, 2021 Cri. L.J. 2419 3. Vijayander Kumar vs. State of Rajasthan and Another, 2014 AIR SCW 1197 4. M/s. Indian Oil Corporation vs. M/s. NEPC India Ltd. and Others, AIR 2006 SC 2780 5- ;ksX; yksd vfHk;kstd us Hkh ;ksX; vf/koDrk ÁR;FkhZ la[;k 02 ds rdksZa dk leFkZu djrs gq, ;kphx.k dh ;kfpdk [kkfjt fd, tkus dk fuosnu fd;kA 6- eSaus mi;qZDr ijLij fojks/kh rdksZ ij fopkj fd;kA tgka rd ;kphx.k ds bl rdZ dk Á'u gS fd gLrxr ÁFke lwpuk fjiksVZ iathc) gksus ls iwoZ gh i{kdkjksa ds e/; ;kfpdk ds iSjk la[;k 03 esa of.kZr ek/;LFke~ ,oa lqyg vf/kfu;e] 1996 o nhokuh dk;Zokgh ds djhc 17 Ádj.k ÁkjaHk gks pqds FksA i{kdkjksa ds e/; okf.kfT;d laO;ogkj gS] tks nhokuh Ád`fr dk gSA ;kphx.k dk Ny dk dksbZ vk'k; ugha jgk gSA 7- mYys[kuh; gS fd i{kdkjksa ds e/; ekStwnk ÁFke lwpuk fjiksVZ ls iwoZ djhc 17 fofHkUu Ádj.kksa dh dk;Zokfg;ka fofHkUu U;k;ky;ksa esa lafLFkr gks pqdh Fkh] ysfdu tgka rd ;kphx.k dk vk'k; Ny dkfjr djus dk Fkk ;k ugha] bl laca/k esa vfrfjDr iqfyl v/kh{kd] ,l-vks-th- ;wfuV] jrux<+ ¼pw:½ dh rF;kRed fjiksVZ fnukad 20-04-2023 ds voyksdu ls ;g ÁdV gksrk gS fd fnukad 25-09-2019 ls fnukad 03-10-2019 rd cktkj esa Lower Circuit yxus ls ;kphx.k dks Castor seed ds lkSns esa djhc 53-28 djksM+ #i;ksa dh gkfu gqbZ] ftldk Hkqxrku ;kphx.k }kjk ugha fd, tkus ls NCDEX }kjk Ganpati Multi Commodity Business (India) Pvt. Ltd. ds vU; xzkgdksa ds lkSnksa dks Square Off dj mudh ekftZu euh mDr uqdlku esa lek;ksftr dh xbZA ;kphx.k dh ekftZu euh djhc 10-37 djksM+ #i;s FkhA Castor seed esa yxkrkj Lower Circuit yxus ds dkj.k ;kphx.k dks uqdlku gksus ls czksdj Ganpati Multi Commodity Business (India) Pvt. Ltd. dh nsunkfj;ksa ls cpus ds fy, fnukad 30-09-2019 ls fnukad 02-12-2019 ds e/; csbZekuh ,oa diViwoZd ;kphx.k us viuh laifRr;ka vius fj'rsnkjksa dks varfjr dhA rF;kRed fjiksVZ ds vuqlkj deyk nsoh us djhc 07 laifRr;ka] Ánhi vxzoky us 03 laifRr;ka] js[kk jkuh vxzoky us 04 laifRRk;ka o ,d laifRr Áse dqekj vxzoky us] bl Ádkj dqy 15 laifRr;ka nsunkfj;ksa ls cpus ds fy, varfjr dhA 8- fdlh O;fDr }kjk viuh nsunkfj;ksa ls cpus ds fy, djhc 02 ekg dh vof/k esa dkQh laifRr;ksa dks vius utnhdh fj'rsnkjksa dks varfjr djus dk d`R; ÁFken`”V;k ysunkj ds fgrksa dks Áfrdwy :i ls ÁHkkfor djus dh Js.kh esa vkuk n`f”Vxr gksrk gS vkSj ,slk d`R; Ny dh ifjf/k esa vkrk gSA dksbZ Hkh O;fDr viuh laifRr varfjr dj ldrk gS] ysfdu ;fn dksbZ O;fDr viuh nsunkfj;ksa ls cpus ds fy, Ny ds vk'k; ls diViwoZd laifRr;ka varfjr djrk gS] rc fQj ;g d`R; vijk/k dh Js.kh esa vkrk gSA ;fn dksbZ d`R; vijk/k dh Js.kh esa vkrk gS vkSj mlds fy, vkijkf/kd dk;Zokgh ÁkjaHk dh tkrh gS] rc fQj mls fof/k dk nq#i;ksx gksuk ugha ekuk tk ldrk gSA 9- gLrxr Ádj.k esa ;kphx.k dh djhc 40 djksM+ #i;s dh nsunkjh gS vkSj mlds fy, fofHkUu U;k;ky;ksa esa fofHkUu Ád`fr ds Ádj.k Hkh yafcr gSA ;fn ,d {k.k ds fy, bu dk;Zokfg;ksa esa ifjoknh ds i{k esa dksbZ fu.kZ; gksrk gS] rks LokHkkfod :i ls olwyh ;kphx.k dh laifRr ls gh gksuh gS] ysfdu tc ;kphx.k us viuh laifRr;ka nsunkfj;ksa ls cpus ds fy, fudV ds fj'rsnkjksa dks varfjr dj nh] rc fQj mudk vk'k; ifjoknh ds lkFk Ny dk gh n`f”Vxr gksrk gSA 10- dsoy nhokuh dk;Zokgh yafcr gksus ds vk/kkj ij /kkjk 482 naM ÁfØ;k lafgrk ds v/khu vkijkf/kd dk;Zokgh dks vikLr fd;k tkuk mfpr Árhr ugha gksrk gSA bl laca/k esa Dr. Lakshman vs. State of Karnataka and Others, AIR 2019 SC 5268 dh uthj esa ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; us fuEufyf[kr fl)kar Áfrikfnr fd;k gS %& “9. ... Mere filing of the suits for recovery of the money and complaint filed under Section 138 of the N.I. Act by itself is no ground to quash the proceedings in the complaints filed by the appellant herein. When cheating and criminal conspiracy are alleged against the accused, for advancing a huge sum of Rs.9 crores, it is a matter which is to be tried, but at the same time the High Court has entered into the disputed area, at the stage of considering the petitions filed under Section 482, Cr.P.C. It is fairly well settled that power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is to be exercised sparingly when the case is not made out for the offences alleged on the reading of the complaint itself or in cases where such complaint is filed by way of abuse of the process. Whether any Schedules were appended to the agreement or not, a finding is required to be recorded after full fledged trial. Further, as the contract is for the purpose of procuring the land, as such the same is of civil nature, as held by the High Court, is also no ground for quashing. Though the contract is of civil nature, if there is an element of cheating and fraud it is always open for a party in a contract, to prosecute the other side for the offences alleged. Equally, mere filing of a suit or complaint filed under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, 1881 by itself is no ground to quash the proceedings. While considering the petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., we are of the view that the High Court also committed an error that there is a novation of the contract in view of the subsequent agreement entered into on 08.11.2012. Whether there is novation of contract or not and the effect of such entering into the contract is a matter which is required to be considered only after trial but not at the stage of considering the application under Section 482, Cr.P.C.” 11. Vijayander Kumar vs. State of Rajasthan and Another, 2014 AIR SCW 1197 dh uthj esa ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; us fuEufyf[kr fl)kar Áfrikfnr fd;k gS%& “11. Vijayander Kumar vs. State of Rajasthan and Another, 2014 AIR SCW 1197 dh uthj esa ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; us fuEufyf[kr fl)kar Áfrikfnr fd;k gS%& “11. No doubt, the views of the High Court in respect of averments and allegations in the FIR were in the context of a prayer to quash the FIR itself but in the facts of this case those findings and observations are still relevant and they do not support the contentions on behalf of the appellants. At the present stage when the informant and witnesses have supported the allegations made in the FIR, it would not be proper for this Court to evaluate the merit of the allegations on the basis of documents annexed with the memo of appeal. Such materials can be produced by the appellants in their defence in accordance with law for due consideration at appropriate stage.” 12. M/s. Indian Oil Corporation vs. M/s. NEPC India Ltd. and Others, AIR 2006 SC 2780 dh uthj esa ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; us fuEufyf[kr fl)kar Áfrikfnr fd;k gS%& “9. The principles relating to exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash complaints and criminal proceedings have been stated and reiterated by this Court in several decisions. To mention a few - Madhavrao Jiwaji Rao Scindia vs. Sambhajirao Chandrojirao Angre, 1988 (1) SCC 692 , State of Haryana vs. Bhajanlal, 1992 Supp. (1) SCC 335, Rupan Deol Bajaj vs. Kanwar Pal Singh Gill, 1995 (6) SCC 194 , Central Bureau of Investigation vs. Duncans Agro Industries Ltd. 1996 (5) SCC 591 , State of Bihar vs. Rajendra Agrawalla, 1996 (8) SCC 164 , Rajesh Bajaj vs. State NCT of Delhi, 1999 (3) SCC 259 , Medchl Chemicals and Pharma (P) Ltd. vs. Biological E. Ltd. 2000 (3) SCC 269 , Hridaya Ranjan Prasad Verma vs. State of Bihar, 2000 (4) SCC 168 , M. Krishnan vs. Vijay Kumar, 2001 (8) SCC 645 and Zandu Phamaceutical Works Ltd. vs. Mohd. Sharaful Haque, 2005 (1) SCC 122 . The principles, relevant to our purpose are: (i) A complaint can be quashed where the allegations made in the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety, do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out the case alleged against the accused. Sharaful Haque, 2005 (1) SCC 122 . The principles, relevant to our purpose are: (i) A complaint can be quashed where the allegations made in the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety, do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out the case alleged against the accused. For this purpose, the complaint has to be examined as a whole, but without examining the merits of the allegations. Neither a detailed inquiry nor a meticulous analysis of the material nor an assessment of the reliability or genuineness of the allegations in the complaint, is warranted while examining prayer for quashing of a complaint. (ii) A complaint may also be quashed where it is a clear abuse of the process of the court, as when the criminal proceeding is found to have been initiated with mala-fides/malice for wreaking vengeance or to cause harm, or where the allegations are absurd and inherently improbable. (iii) The power to quash shall not, however, be used to stifle or scuttle a legitimate prosecution. The power should be used sparingly and with abundant caution. (iv) The complaint is not required to verbatim reproduce the legal ingredients of the offence alleged. If the necessary factual foundation is laid in the complaint, merely on the ground that a few ingredients have not been stated in detail, the proceedings should not be quashed. Quashing of the complaint is warranted only where the complaint is so bereft of even the basic facts which are absolutely necessary for making out the offence. (v) A given set of facts may make out : (a) purely a civil wrong; or (b) purely a criminal offence; or (c) a civil wrong as also a criminal offence. A commercial transaction or a contractual dispute, apart from furnishing a cause of action for seeking remedy in civil law, may also involve a criminal offence. As the nature and scope of a civil proceedings are different from a criminal proceeding, the mere fact that the complaint relates to a commercial transaction or breach of contract, for which a civil remedy is available or has been availed, is not by itself a ground to quash the criminal proceedings. The test is whether the allegations in the complaint disclose a criminal offence or not. 10...... 11...... The test is whether the allegations in the complaint disclose a criminal offence or not. 10...... 11...... 12....But these are defences that will have to be put forth and considered during the trial. Defences that may be available, or facts/aspects when established during the trial, may lead to acquittal, are not grounds for quashing the complaint at the threshold. At this stage, we are only concerned with the question whether the averments in the complaint spell out the ingredients of a criminal offence or not.” 13- rF;kRed fjiksVZ esa Special Operation Group ;wfuV jrux<+] ¼pw:½ us vfHk;qDrx.k Ánhidqekj] Ásedqekj] deyk nsoh] js[kkjkuh o usgk vxzoky ds fo#) /kkjk 420] 421 o 120ch Hkkjrh; naM lafgrk ds vijk/k ÁFken`”V;k Áekf.kr ik, gSaA ;kphx.k dh vksj ls ÁLrqr leLr lk{; cpko ls lacaf/kr gS] tks os Ádj.k ds mfpr ÁØe ij ÁLrqr djus ds fy, Lora= gSA ysfdu ÁFken`”V;k vfHkys[k ij miyC/k lkexzh ds vk/kkj ij ;g ÁdV ugha gksrk gS fd ;kphx.k ds fo#) dksbZ vijk/k ugha curk gksA 14. Central Bureau of Investigation vs. Ravi Shankar Srivastava, IAS and Others, Criminal Appeal No. 36 of 2002 fu.kZ; fnukad 10-08-2006 esa ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; us iSjk la[;k 07 esa fuEufyf[kr fl)kar Áfrikfnr fd;k gS%& “7. As noted above, the powers possessed by the High Court under Section 482 of the Code are very wide and the very plenitude of the power requires great caution in its exercise. Court must be careful to see that its decision in exercise of this power is based on sound principles. The inherent power should not be exercised to stifle a legitimate prosecution....” 15. Sanapareddy Maheedhar and Others vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and Others, Criminal Appeal No. 1708 of 2007 fu.kZ; fnukad 13-12-2007 esa ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; us iSjk la[;k 26 esa fuEufyf[kr fl)kar Áfrikfnr fd;k gS%& “26. The inherent power should not be exercised to stifle a legitimate prosecution....” 15. Sanapareddy Maheedhar and Others vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and Others, Criminal Appeal No. 1708 of 2007 fu.kZ; fnukad 13-12-2007 esa ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; us iSjk la[;k 26 esa fuEufyf[kr fl)kar Áfrikfnr fd;k gS%& “26. In Ramesh Chand Sinha's case (supra) this Court quashed the decision of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patna to take cognÁance of the offence allegedly committed by the appellants by observing that the same was barred by time and there were no valid grounds to extend the period of limitation by invoking Section 473 Cr.P.C. A careful reading of the above noted judgments makes it clear that the High Court should be extremely cautious and slow to interfere with the investigation and/or trial of criminal cases and should not stall the investigation and/or prosecution except when it is convinced beyond any manner of doubt that the FIR does not disclose commission of any offence or that the allegations contained in the FIR do not constitute any cognÁable offence or that the prosecution is barred by law or the High Court is convinced that it is necessary to interfere to prevent abuse of the process of the court. In dealing with such cases, the High Court has to bear in mind that judicial intervention at the threshold of the legal process initiated against a person accused of committing offence is highly detrimental to the larger public and societal interest. The people and the society have a legitimate expectation that those committing offences either against an individual or the society are expeditiously brought to trial and, if found guilty, adequately punished. Therefore, while deciding a petition filed for quashing the FIR or complaint or restraining the competent authority from investigating the allegations contained in the FIR or complaint or for stalling the trial of the case, the High Court should be extremely careful and circumspect. If the allegations contained in the FIR or complaint discloses commission of some crime, then the High Court must keep its hands off and allow the investigating agency to complete the investigation without any fetter and also refrain from passing order which may impede the trial. The High Court should not go into the merits and demerits of the allegations simply because the petitioner alleges malus animus against the author of the FIR or the complainant. The High Court should not go into the merits and demerits of the allegations simply because the petitioner alleges malus animus against the author of the FIR or the complainant. The High Court must also refrain from making imaginary journey in the realm of possible harassment which may be caused to the petitioner on account of investigation of the FIR or complaint. Such a course will result in miscarriage of justice and would encourage those accused of committing crimes to repeat the same. However, if the High Court is satisfied that the complaint does not disclose commission of any offence or prosecution is barred by limitation or that the proceedings of criminal case would result in failure of justice, then it may exercise inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C.” 16- tgka rd ;kphx.k dh vksj ls ÁLrqr mi;qZDr uthjksa dk Á'u gS] os gLrxr Ádj.k esa gq, mi;qZDr foospu] Ádj.k ds rF;ksa ,oa ifjfLFkfr;ksa esa ;kphx.k dks dksbZ lgk;rk ugha djrh gSA 17- ;g fufoZokfnr rF; gS fd ;kphx.k us gLrxr ÁFke lwpuk fjiksVZ ds laca/k esa iwoZ esa Hkh ,d /kkjk 482 naM ÁfØ;k lafgrk ds v/khu ;kfpdk S.B. Criminal Misc. (Pet.) No. 63/2020 bl U;k;ky; ds le{k ÁLrqr dh] ftldk fu.kZ; fnukad 25-02-2020 dks fd;k x;k vkSj ml ;kfpdk esa fuEufyf[kr vkns'k ikfjr fd;k x;k%& ^^fopkj fd;k x;kA mijksDrkuqlkj rF;ksa dh jks'kuh esa ;kphx.k dh vksj ls ÁLrqr ;g fofo/k ;kfpdk bl funsZ'k ds lkFk fuLrkfjr dh tkrh gS fd ;kphx.k vkt gh ;ksX; yksd vfHk;kstd dks viuk foLr`r ÁR;kosnu e; nLrkostkr ÁLrqr djsA ;ksX; yksd vfHk;kstd }kjk ÁR;kosnu e; nLrkostkr ÁkIr gksus ij lacaf/kr vuqla/kku vf/kdkjh dks rhu fnu ds Hkhrj Ásf”kr fd;s tk;sA vuqla/kku vf/kdkjh }kjk ÁR;kosnu e; nLrkostkr dks jsdMZ ij ÁkIr dj mudk iw.kZ :i ls voyksdu dj fu”d”kZ fudky dj urhtk lacaf/kr U;k;ky; esa is'k djsaA LFkxu ;kfpdk Hkh mijksDrkuqlkj fuLrkfjr dh tkrh gSA** 18- vc fopkj.kh; fcanq ;g mRiUu gksrk gS fd D;k ;g f}rh; ;kfpdk varxZr /kkjk 482 naM ÁfØ;k lafgrk ds v/khu iks”k.kh; gS vFkok ugha\ bl laca/k esa ;kphx.k dk ;g dFku gS fd Ádj.k Special Operation Group dks varfjr fd;k x;k gS vkSj Special Operation Group us dbZ vfu;ferrk,a dh gSa] blfy, ifjfLFkfr;ksa esa ifjorZu gksus ls gLrxr ;kfpdk iks”k.kh; gSA ysfdu muds bl rdZ esa dksbZ cy Árhr ugha gksrk gS] D;ksafd vUos”k.k vf/kdkjh us nkSjkus cgl U;k;ky; ds le{k ;g ÁdV fd;k gS fd gLrxr Ádj.k esa ikap djksM+ ls vf/kd dh jkf'k dk Á'u varxZzLr gS] blfy, Ádj.k Special Operation Group dks varfjr fd;k x;k gSA iwoZ vUos”k.k vf/kdkjh o orZeku vUos”k.k vf/kdkjh] nksuksa us gh ;kphx.k ds fo#) vkjksi Áekf.kr ik, gSaA 19. Special Operation Group dks Ádj.k varfjr gksus ij Special Operation Group us D;k vfu;ferrk,a dh] ;g Li”V ugha fd;k x;k gSA dsoy Special Operation Group dks Ádj.k varfjr gksus ls Ádj.k dh ifjfLFkfr;ksa esa dksbZ ifjorZu gksuk ugha dgk tk ldrk gSA Special Operation Group Hkh jktLFkku iqfyl dk gh ,d vax gSA gLrxr Ádj.k esa ifjoknh us fyf[kr fjiksVZ Hkh Additional Director General of Police, Special Operation Group, Jaipur dks Ásf”kr dh] tks iqfyl mi&v/kh{kd] 'kgj Jhxaxkuxj ls ÁkIr fjiksVZ ds vk/kkj ij Ádj.k iathc) fd;k x;kA ÁkjaHk esa vUos”k.k jktLFkku iqfyl }kjk fd;k x;k vkSj fQj Ádj.k esa ikap djksM+ #i;s ls vf/kd dh jkf'k varxzZLr gksus ls] Ádj.k Special Operation Group dks varfjr fd;k x;kA dsoy Special Operation Group dks vUos”k.k varfjr gksus ds vk/kkj ij ;g ugha dgk tk ldrk gS fd Ádj.k dh ifjfLFkfr;ksa esa dksbZ ifjorZu gqvk gksA vr% ,slh ifjfLFkfr;ksa esa ;kphx.k ds bl rdZ esa dksbZ cy Árhr ugha gksrk gS fd Special Operation Group dks Ádj.k varfjr gksus ls /kkjk 482 naM ÁfØ;k lafgrk ds rgr ÁLrqr ;g f}rh; nkafMd fofo/k ;kfpdk iks”k.kh; gSA 20. S.B. Criminal Misc. (Pet.) No. 63/2020 fu.kZ; fnukad 25-02- 2020 esa ikfjr vkns'k dh ikyuk esa gLrxr ;kfpdk ls iwoZ ;kphx.k us ÁR;kosnu dc ÁLrqr fd;k] ;g ;kfpdk ds voyksdu ls ÁdV ugha gksrk gSA ;kfpdk ds iSjk la[;k 05 esa ;kphx.k us ;g vafdr fd;k gS fd mUgksaus foLr`r ÁR;kosnu l{ke vf/kdkjh ds le{k ÁLrqr fd;k] ysfdu ÁR;kosnu dc ÁLrqr fd;k] ;g Li”V ugha fd;k x;k gSA isij cqd ds i`”B la[;k 14 ls 31 ds vuqlkj ;kphx.k us vyx&vyx ÁR;kosnu fnukad 10-08-2022 dks ÁLrqr fd,A gLrxr ;kfpdk fnukad 21-09-2020 dks ÁLrqr dh xbZ gSA bl Ádkj gLrxr ;kfpdk ÁLrqr djus ds i'pkr~ ;kphx.k }kjk ÁR;kosnu ÁLrqr djus n`f”Vxr gksrs gSaA cgl ds le; mifLFkr vUos”k.k vf/kdkjh us ;g ÁdV fd;k fd ;kphx.k us tks Hkh ÁR;kosnu ÁLrqr fd, gSa] mu ij fopkj djus ds i'pkr~ ;kphx.k ds fo#) ÁFken`”V;k vijk/k Áekf.kr ik, x, gSaA bl Ádkj ifjfLFkfr;ksa esa dksbZ ifjorZu gksuk n`f”Vxr ugha gksrk gSA f}rh; ;kfpdk esa dksbZ u, l'kDr vk/kkj Hkh vafdr ugha gSA blfy, ;kphx.k dks /kkjk 482 naM ÁfØ;k lafgrk ds v/khu ;g f}rh; ;kfpdk ÁLrqr djus dk vf/kdkj ugha gSA bl laca/k esa ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; us Mahendra Singh and Others vs. State of Bihar, Cri. Appeal No. 198 of 2001, dated 16.02.2001 esa fuEufyf[kr fl)kar Áfrikfnr fd;k gS%& “2.....There cannot be any dispute that the accused were not entitled to file so many applications before the High Court invoking jurisdiction under Section 482....” 21- blh Ádkj iatkc ,oa gfj;k.kk mPp U;k;ky; us Thakkar Dass vs. State of Haryana, Criminal Misc. No. 3056-M of 1990, dated 18.12.1990 dh uthj ds iSjk la[;k 06 esa fuEufyf[kr er O;Dr fd;k gS%& “6.....He does not allege any change of circumstances nor any fresh ground of attack. In such a situation, no petition under Section 482, Cr.P.C. read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India is competent. If there had been any change of circumstance then a petition under Section 482, Cr. P.C. read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India could be competent but without any change in the circumstances, on the same facts and grounds, no subsequent petition will be competent. It will amount to review of the earlier order. To our mind, the legal position is clear and this second petition on the same facts is not competent and is dismissed....” 22- dqy feykdj] mi;qZDr foospu ds ifj.kkeLo:i ;kphx.k dh vksj ls /kkjk 482 naM ÁfØ;k lafgrk ds rgr ÁLrqr ;g f}rh; fofo/k nkafMd ;kfpdk fof/kd :i ls iks”k.kh; ugha gS vkSj lkFk gh vfHkys[k ij miyC/k lkexzh ds ifjÁs{; esa xq.kkoxq.k ds vk/kkj ij Hkh ;kfpdk cyghu gSA 23- ifj.kker% ;kphx.k dh vksj ls /kkjk 482 naM ÁfØ;k lafgrk ds rgr iqfyl Fkkuk tokgj uxj] ftyk Jhxaxkuxj esa ntZ ÁFke lwpuk fjiksVZ la[;k 631@2019 dks fujLr djus gsrq ÁLrqr ;g f}rh; fofo/k nkafMd ;kfpdk [kkfjt dh tkrh gSA 24- bl ;kfpdk esa iwoZ esa ikfjr varfje vkns'k fnukad 01-10-2020 vkt ls vkxkeh 02 lIrkg dh vof/k rd ÁHkko'khy jgsxkA