SMT. REKHA JAIN AND ANR. versus THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ORS.

SMT. REKHA JAIN AND ANR. versus THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ORS.

Because the only allegation against the appellants was that they purchased the property in 2019 and there was no material that any attachment was in force or registered at the time nor any link to the misappropriation, there was no prima facie case under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC; continuation of proceedings would be an abuse of process and the High Court should have quashed the proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C.; accordingly the proceedings and charge sheet are quashed insofar as the appellants are concerned.

Parties
Appellant: Smt. Rekha Jain; Appellant: Smt. Minakshi Jain; Respondent State: The State of Uttar Pradesh; Respondent Complainant: Pradeep Singhal
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
03 February 2022
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From High Court Order Under Section 482 Cr.p.c.
Outcome
Appeal allowed; impugned High Court order set aside
Legal Topics
Quashing of FIR, Section 482 Cr.p.c., Bona Fide Purchaser, Attachment of Property, Abuse of Process
Criminal Procedure Criminal Law Quashing of FIR Section 482 Cr.p.c. Bona Fide Purchaser Attachment of Property Abuse of Process

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Smt. Rekha Jain

Appellant

Smt. Minakshi Jain

Appellant

The State of Uttar Pradesh

Respondent State

Pradeep Singhal

Respondent Complainant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From High Court Order Under Section 482 Cr.p.c.

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether criminal proceedings against the appellants should be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
  2. 2 Whether there is any prima facie case against the appellants for offences under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC
  3. 3 Whether purchase of the property in 2019 by the appellants amounted to commission of the offences alleged

Ratio Decidendi

Because the only allegation against the appellants was that they purchased the property in 2019 and there was no material that any attachment was in force or registered at the time nor any link to the misappropriation, there was no prima facie case under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC; continuation of proceedings would be an abuse of process and the High Court should have quashed the proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C.; accordingly the proceedings and charge sheet are quashed insofar as the appellants are concerned.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; impugned High Court order set aside

Orders

  • Criminal proceedings arising out of Case Crime No. 48 of 2019 for offences under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC, including the charge sheet, are quashed and set aside in so far as appellants Smt. Rekha Jain and Smt. Minakshi Jain are concerned
  • Present appeal allowed