NDLI: A.m. Mohan Vs. The State Represented By Sho and Another

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	Quashing
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Act(s) Referred	Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974)
Case(s) Referred	Referred Case 0 Referred Case 1 Referred Case 2 Referred Case 3 Referred Case 4
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Appeal Allowed
Headnote	Penal Code, 1860 – s.420 – Ingredients – s.420 when not attracted: Held: For attracting the provision of s.420, IPC, the FIR/complaint must show that the ingredients of s.415, IPC are made out – It must be shown that the FIR/complaint discloses the deception of any person; fraudulently or dishonestly inducing that person to deliver any property to any person; and dishonest intention of the accused at the time of making the inducement – In the present case, no role of inducement at all has been attributed to the appellant – Allegations w.r.t inducement are only against accused Nos.1 and 2 – Rather, from the perusal of the FIR and the charge-sheet, it would reveal that there was no transaction of any nature directly between the appellant and the complainant – FIR or the charge-sheet, even if taken at its face value, does not disclose the ingredients to attract the provision of s.420, IPC qua the appellant – Dishonest inducement is the sine qua non to attract the provisions of ss. 415 and 420 of IPC and the same is totally lacking qua the appellant – In that view of the matter, continuation of the criminal proceedings against the appellant would be nothing else but amount to abuse of process of law resulting in miscarriage of justice – Impugned orders and the FIR alongwith the chargesheet filed against the appellant, quashed and set aside. [Paras 13, 15, 19, 20 and 24]Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.482 – Exercise of jurisdiction under – Discussed. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.482 – FIR registered against appellant u/s.420 r/w s.34, Penal Code, 1860 – High Court rejected the petition filed by the appellant u/s.482 – Present appeal filed – Contention of the respondents that since the charge-sheet has been filed, the present appeal is liable to be dismissed:Held: Said contention has no merit – As rightly held in Anand Kumar Mohatta and Another v. State (NCT of Delhi), Department of Home and Another, [2018] 13 SCR 1028, there is nothing in the words of this section which restricts the exercise of the power of the Court to prevent the abuse of process of court or miscarriage of justice only to the stage of the FIR – High Court can exercise jurisdiction u/s.482 CrPC even when the discharge application is pending with the trial court – Indeed, it would be a travesty to hold that proceedings initiated against a person can be interfered with at the stage of FIR but not if it has advanced and the allegations have materialised into a charge-sheet – On the contrary it could be said that the abuse of process caused by FIR stands aggravated if the FIR has taken the form of a charge-sheet after investigation – The power is undoubtedly conferred to prevent abuse of process of power of any court. [Paras 21, 23]
Judge	Hon'ble Mr. Justice Bhushan Ramkrishna Gavai
Neutral Citation	2024 INSC 233
Petitioner	A.m. Mohan
Respondent	The State Represented By Sho And Another
SCR	[2024] 3 S.C.R. 722
Judgement Date	2024-03-20
Case Number	1716

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

A.m. Mohan Vs. The State Represented By Sho and Another

Please Log-in to view this content

Arulvelu and Another Vs. State Represented By The Public Prosecutor and Another

State of Haryana Vs. Dr. Ritu Singh and Another

Madan Mohan Abbot Vs. State of Punjab

M. Mohan Vs. The State Represented By The Deputy Superintendent of Police

Thirumoorthy Vs. State Represented By The Inspector of Police

Chhadami Lal Jain and Others Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh and Another

Hameedia Hardware Stores, Represented By Its Partner S. Peer Mohammed Vs. B. Mohan Lal Sowcar

Krishnan Vs. State Represented By Inspector of Police

Stalin Vs. State Represented By The Inspector of Police

A.m. Mohan Vs. The State Represented By Sho and Another

A.m. Mohan Vs. The State Represented By Sho and Another

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

Arulvelu and Another Vs. State Represented By The Public Prosecutor and Another

State of Haryana Vs. Dr. Ritu Singh and Another

Madan Mohan Abbot Vs. State of Punjab

M. Mohan Vs. The State Represented By The Deputy Superintendent of Police

Thirumoorthy Vs. State Represented By The Inspector of Police

Chhadami Lal Jain and Others Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh and Another

Hameedia Hardware Stores, Represented By Its Partner S. Peer Mohammed Vs. B. Mohan Lal Sowcar

Krishnan Vs. State Represented By Inspector of Police

Stalin Vs. State Represented By The Inspector of Police

A.m. Mohan Vs. The State Represented By Sho and Another