Magistrate's failure to conduct section 202 inquiry before issuing summons renders criminal proceedings abuse of process

The HC allowed the revisional application and set aside the summons issued against the petitioner. The Magistrate failed to comply with mandatory provisions under section 202 Cr.P.C. by not conducting proper inquiry before issuing summons under section 204 Cr.P.C., particularly when the accused resided outside the court's jurisdiction. The court found that continuing criminal proceedings would constitute abuse of process, as the petitioner had validly resigned after completing minimum service tenure and proper relieving documents were issued. The HC distinguished this case from precedents where section 202 inquiry was conducted, emphasizing that no such inquiry occurred here despite jurisdictional requirements.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Abuse of Process of Law
2. Disclosure of Offense Ingredients
3. Compliance with Section 202 of Cr.P.C.

Summary:

1. Abuse of Process of Law:
The petitioner, an ex-employee, filed a revisional application u/s 482 of the Cr.P.C. to quash proceedings in Complaint Case No. A.C. 711 of 2016 u/s 420 and 406 of the IPC, pending before the Judicial Magistrate, 6th Court at Alipore. The petitioner argued that the criminal proceedings were initiated spitefully to harass him post-employment, constituting an abuse of the process of law and court.

2. Disclosure of Offense Ingredients:
The petitioner contended that the complaint did not disclose the ingredients of the offenses attributed to him. He was employed as a 'Wind Resource Analyst' and resigned after fulfilling his contractual obligations. The company issued an Experience Certificate and Relieving Letter, and credited his final salary. The complaint alleged that the petitioner did not return a laptop and valuable documents, causing a loss of Rs. 1.5 lakhs, later stated as Rs. 5 lakhs in the initial deposition. The petitioner argued there was no entrustment of such items, and the complaint was frivolous.

3. Compliance with Section 202 of Cr.P.C.:
The petitioner, residing outside the jurisdiction of the Magistrate, argued that the mandatory provision u/s 202(1) of Cr.P.C. was not complied with before issuing process u/s 204 of Cr.P.C. The court noted that the Magistrate issued summons without conducting the mandatory inquiry u/s 202 of Cr.P.C., which requires examining the complainant and witnesses to ascertain the truth of the allegations.

Judgment:
The court found that the Magistrate committed an error of law by issuing summons without complying with the mandatory provisions of section 202 of Cr.P.C. The order dated 15.03.2016 issuing summons was set aside. The matter was remitted to the Judicial Magistrate, 6th Court, Alipore, to pass a fresh order after complying with section 202 of Cr.P.C., preferably within two months. The revisional application was allowed on its merit.

---