The Supreme Court states that mere pendency of a civil case between complainant and accused is not a reason to quash criminal case.

The Bench of Justice Dinesh Maheshwari observed-

“The High Court failed to see that mere pendency of a civil suit is not an answer to the question as to whether a case under Sections 323, 379 read with Section 34 IPC is made out against respondent Nos. 2 and 3 or not. The High Court should have seen that when a specific grievance of the appellant in his complaint was that respondent Nos. 2 and 3 have committed the offences punishable under Sections 323, 379 read with Section 34 IPC, then the question to be examined is as to whether there are allegations of commission of these two offences in the complaint or not. In other words, in order to see whether any prima facie case against the accused for taking its cognizance is made out or not, the Court is only required to see the allegations made in the complaint. In the absence of any finding recorded by the High Court on this material question, the impugned order is legally unsustainable.”

In Md. Allauddin Khan vs. State of Bihar, two accused were summoned by the Magistrate in a complaint alleging offence under Sections 323, 379 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The High Court quashed the criminal proceedings against them on the ground that since there was a dispute pending between the parties in the Civil Court in relation to a shop as being landlord and tenant, it is essentially a civil dispute between the parties.

In this regard, the bench said-

“The High Court had no jurisdiction to appreciate the evidence of the proceedings under Section 482 of the Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short “Cr.P.C.”) because whether there are contradictions or/and inconsistencies in the statements of the witnesses is essentially an issue relating to appreciation of evidence and the same can be gone into by the Judicial Magistrate during trial when the entire evidence is adduced by the parties. That stage is yet to come in this case.”

It is due to these two errors, we are of the considered   opinion   that   the reasoning   and   the conclusion   arrived   at   by   the   High   Court   for quashing   the   complaint   filed   by   the   appellant against   respondent is   not   legally sustainable and hence it deserves to be set aside.

The appeal therefore succeeds and is accordingly allowed. The impugned order of the Hon’ble High Court is set aside. It was further directed to proceed to conclude the trial on merits on the basis of evidence adduced by the parties.

Judgment-Allauddhin Khan V State of Bihar

Image Link-