Abuse of process in a land dispute led to quashing where the complaint disclosed no SC/ST Act offence.

A prolonged land dispute, pursued through civil proceedings for years, was later converted into a criminal complaint after development, approvals and sale of apartments, which the Court viewed as indicative of mala fide pressure tactics. The Court reiterated that inherent power to prevent abuse of process and secure the ends of justice permits quashing even where a special statute is invoked, if the allegations are essentially civil or do not disclose the alleged offence. On the face of the FIR and complaint, no offence under the SC/ST Act was made out against the appellant, and the FIR and consequential proceedings were quashed insofar as they related to the appellant.

---

---

Issues: Whether the FIR and the proceedings arising therefrom, including the invocation of the SC/ST Act, were liable to be quashed as an abuse of process of law because the dispute was essentially civil in nature and lacked prima facie criminality against the appellant.

Analysis: The dispute over the land had persisted for decades, yet no serious challenge was raised until after the original land-owners entered into the joint development arrangement, obtained clearances, completed construction, and sold the apartments. The sequence of events, including repeated failure in civil proceedings and the institution of the criminal complaint thereafter, indicated a mala fide attempt to use criminal law as pressure in a property dispute. The Court reiterated that inherent power under Section 482 of the Code is to be used to prevent abuse of process and secure the ends of justice, and that even in matters involving a special statute, quashing is permissible where the allegations are primarily civil or do not disclose the offence alleged. On the face of the complaint and FIR, no offence under the SC/ST Act was made out against the appellant.

Conclusion: The FIR and all consequential proceedings, insofar as they related to the appellant, were liable to be quashed; the appeal succeeded in favour of the appellant.

---