Criminal Procedure Code, 1973
Section 482—Inherent powers of High Court—Exercise of—While exercising inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of CrPC, the High Court is not supposed to hold a mini trial.
[Para 15]
Indian Penal Code, 1860
Sections 384, 389, 406 & 420 read with Section 34 & 120B—Obtaining contract fraudulently by submitting forged and fabricated documents—Appeal against judgment passed by the High Court quashing the summoning order as well as criminal proceedings—Aspect about complicity of a person who was involved in the forgery is a disputed question of fact and same will have to be addressed after a proper appreciation of evidence which can be done only during trial and not at such a nascent stage when summons is served—Magistrate while considering the fact that second respondent was a beneficiary and after considering the scope of summons order had rightly observed that a prima facie case is made out and same required an adjudication through a trial—High Court has delved into an aspect which was absolutely not warranted and has exceeded its jurisdiction—High Court ought to have considered the complicity of accused in case of forgery, which will have to be addressed after a proper appreciation of evidence and such appreciation of evidence can be done only by undertaking the initial process i.e. by conducting the trial on the aspect of forgery—Summons order was only at an initial stage and at such a nascent stage, the High Court ought not to have recorded the finding on the aspect of forgery—Admittedly respondents are the beneficiaries and merely because appellant was an equal mischief player and/or a person having criminal antecedents at his credit by itself will not absolve respondents from the criminal liability as alleged against them—Impugned judgment passed by the High Court is set aside and matter remanded the matter to the Magistrate for proceeding with the trial in accordance with law—Appeal allowed.
[Paras 13 to 18]